C.R. No. 6144 of 2007 1 IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH C.R. No. 6144 of 2007 Date of Decision : 31.8.2009 New India Assurance Company Limited .......... Petitioner Versus Tara Chand Yadav & another ...... Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VINOD K. SHARMA Present : Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. C.B. Kaushik, Advocate for respondent No.1. **** VINOD K. SHARMA, J. (ORAL) This revision petition by New India Assurance Company Limited is directed against the order dated 9.4.2007, passed by the learned Permanent Lok Adalat ( Public Utility Services), Gurgaon allowing an application filed in the Lok Adalat at the pre-litigation stage. The learned Permanent Lok Adalat passed award against the petitioner directing the petitioner to pay 50% of the price of the tyres and tubes, as shown in the purchase memos of 3rd and 4th January 2006. The claim raised by respondent Tara Chand Yadav was contested primarily on the ground that the claim was settled at Rs. 1,12,636/- ( Rupees one lac twelve thousand six hundred and thirty six only ), therefore, the respondent C.R. No. 6144 of 2007 2 was not entitled to any additional amount. The learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the impugned order primarily on the ground, that as the petitioner had not consented to the passing of the order by the Lok Adalat, it was required to be recalled and complaint decided on merits by the District Forum. It was also the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, that the order of Lok Adalat being not a consent order, is not enforceable in law. The learned District Forum by way of impugned order, instead of deciding the application, is trying to implement the order, which cannot be sustained in law. The learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Punjab and others Vs. Ganpat Raj, (2006)8 SCC 364, to contend that in absence of compromise or settlement, no order could be passed by the Lok Adalat. He also placed reliance on the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in Sant Ram and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, 2008(4) Civil Court Cases 264, to contend that unless the award of the Lok Adalat is based on consent of the parties, it is a nullity and, therefore, not enforceable. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner deserves to be accepted, as it is settled law that the Permanent Lok Adalat can only pass consent orders and cannot adjudicate on the contested claims. The revision is accordingly allowed. The impugned order is set aside. However, this order shall not be treated to be decision on merit to hold, as to whether the respondent is entitled or not to the claim raised. The C.R. No. 6144 of 2007 3 respondent, if so advised, can avail his remedy in accordance with law to claim the amount spent by him for replacement of tyres and tubes. 31.8.2009 ( VINOD K. SHARMA ) 'sp' JUDGE