IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 MACA.No. 2138 of 2007() ----------------------- OPMV.244/2005 of MOTOR ACCIDENTS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, MAVELIKKARA .................... APPELLANT/PETITONER: ------------------------------------ LEELA, LEKSHMI NIVAS, VERUVALLY BHAGAM, KAYAMKULAM P.O., KEERIKKADU VILLAGE. BY ADV. SRI.S.MOHANAN RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------ THE MANAGER M/S.NATIONAL INSURANCE CO.LTD THRIPUNITHURA DIVISION ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY THIS MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. ------------------------------- M.A.C.A.NO.2138 OF 2007 (A) ----------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of January, 2008 J U D G M E N T KOSHY,J. Appellant is challenging the award passed by the Lok Adalat on the basis of a settlement. The above award shows that it was not signed by the claimant (appellant). Regulation 33 of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority Regulations, 1998 provides that every award should be signed by parties. Since the claimant did not sign the settlement, the award is non-est in law. When such contentions are raised, the regular appeal will not lie but only a petition under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India has to be resorted. However, in this case appeal was directed to be numbered by another Division Bench after holding that parties have not signed the settlement. Hence it is non-est of law. We use the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution and we declare that parties have not signed the settlement and the impugned MACA.2138/2007 2 award cannot be considered as an award. It is the contention of the petitioner that petitioner earlier approached the Registry by filing a writ petition. But that was not accepted and returned in view of the decision in Rajeswary v. Sooraj (2006 (1) KLT 203). Thereafter when the appeal was filed, registry also noted that appeal is also not maintainable in view of the decision in Rajeswari's case (supra). It is true that once Adalat passed an order on merit, it cannot be challenged by filing a regular appeal or filing petition under Article 226 or 227 of the Constitution of India. Section 21(2) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 clearly states that every award made by Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties and no appeal will lie. Above statutory prohibition cannot be overruled by filing a writ petition. But if the award is not challenged, we may assume that petitioner has accepted the same. 2. Here the contention is that award is non-est of law because in the impugned award parties have not signed. According to the appellant, he never agreed to settle the matter and he did not authorise his advocate to sign on behalf MACA.2138/2007 3 of him. In such cases writ petition will lie. But Adalath cannot pass an award if it is not signed by the parties. Regulation 33 (1) of the Kerala State Legal Services Authority Regulations reads as follows: “33. Procedure for effecting compromise or settlement at Lok Adalat:- (1) Every Award of the Lok Adalat shall be signed by the parties to the dispute and the panel constituting the Lok Adalat. Here it is not signed by the parties and hence award passed is not binding on the appellant. In the above circumstances, we declare that award is non-est and using the powers under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, we direct the tribunal to dispose of the petition in accordance with law. This court ordered on 12th November 2005 to issue a notice to Adv.Sri.R.Bhaskaran Nair, who was appearing for the Insurance company and also to the learned Government Pleader. It is submitted that notices were given but no appearance was made. Copy of this judgment should be forwarded to Adv.Sri.R.Bhaskaran Nair who was appearing for the Insurance company. Impugned award is set aside and we remand the MACA.2138/2007 4 matter to the tribunal to dispose of the matter in accordance with law. Tribunal shall also give notice to the counsel appearing before it for the respondent. Parties may appear before the tribunal on 24.3.2008. Appeal allowed by way of remand. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE prp J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO. OF 2006 () --------------------------------------------------------- J U D G M E N T --------------------------------------------------------- 1st January, 2008