IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14933 of 2011 Bijay Choudhary @ Bijay Kumar Choudhary Versus Ram Vilas Choudhary & Ors ---------------------------------- 2. 14.09.2011 Heard the learned counsel Mr. Vinod Kumar Singh appearing on behalf of the petitioner. This writ application has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 4.7.2009 passed in Pre Litigation Partition Suit No. 249 of 2008 by the Presiding Officer of Permanent Lok Adalat, Vaishali at Hazipur whereby the suit for partition in terms of compromise petition was decreed. The learned counsel submitted that the petitioner of this writ application has got a share in the suit property but he was not added as party in the said suit and, therefore, by playing fraud upon the Permanent Lok Adalat the respondents obtained the award. So far this question is concerned, a Division Bench of this Court by terms of order dated 6.11.2009 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 14426 of 2009 has held that the powers of Lok Adalat are not co-extensive with that of civil court. A relevant portion of the order is quoted hereinbelow : “As discussed and held earlier, powers of Lok Adalat are not co-extensive with that of civil courts who have full power to take evidence including oral evidence and also to exercise necessary powers under Section 2 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure. In such situation, in our view, nothing in the Code of Civil Procedure or other law can render the petitioners remediless and following the law noticed above in the case of Smt. Anita (supra), we hold that the petitioners will be entitled to invoke plenary jurisdiction of civil court to claim necessary relief on the ground of fraud or even on the grounds available to petitioner no.1. As a proposition of law it is well established that a person who was not a party to the proceeding, will not be bound by any order passed therein unless he or she was impleaded through a representative like Karta or an authorized agent who may in appropriate situations represent others. With these observations, this writ petition is disposed of. It is made clear that we have not expressed our view with regard to merits of the case and this order will not affect either of the parties on merits. It goes without saying that the civil court, if approached, will examine all the matters and issues on its own merits including issue of granting any interim order or relief to the petitioners but only in accordance with law.” Recently, in (2011) 7 SCC 491 Life Insurance Corporation of India Vs. Suresh Kumar the Apex Court at paragraph 3 held that the Permanent Lok Adalat is not a regular court authorized to adjudicate the dispute between the parties on merits. It is needless to state that Permanent Lok Adalat has no jurisdiction or authority vested in it to decide any lis, as such, between the parties even where the attempt to arrive at an agreed settlement between the parties has failed. It appears that in that case the Lok Adalat converted it itself into a regular court and disposed of the claim of the respondent on merit. That was set 3 aside by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. Considering the above facts and circumstances of the case, the petitioner is at liberty to approach appropriate forum by filing appropriate application as has been held by a Division Bench of this Court as quoted above. With the above observation, this writ application is disposed of. S.S. (Mungeshwar Sahoo,J.)