Lok Adalat- An Overview

Lok Adalat—translated as “People’s Court”—is an alternative dispute resolution mechanism in India. It provides a forum for settling disputes amicably outside the formal judicial system, aiming to resolve both pre-litigation and pending cases in a cost-effective and timely manner. Instituted under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, Lok Adalats have been designed to decongest courts and expedite justice, embodying principles akin to those in traditional dispute resolution methods like arbitration, mediation, and conciliation.

Statutory Framework

Under the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987:

• Statutory Status: Awards made by Lok Adalats are deemed to be decrees of civil courts. They are final and binding, and no appeal can be filed against them.

• Jurisdiction: Lok Adalats handle cases that are either pending before any court or disputes likely to be filed before a court. However, they cannot deal with non-compoundable criminal offenses or matters related to divorce.

Process and Procedure

Referral to Lok Adalat:

• Pending Cases: A case can be referred to a Lok Adalat if parties agree to settle, one party applies to the court, or the court considers it appropriate.

• Pre-Litigation Disputes: These can be referred by the State or District Legal Services Authority upon receiving an application from any party.

Procedure:

• No court fees are required at Lok Adalats. If a case is settled, any court fees previously paid are refunded.

• Lok Adalats are chaired by a sitting or retired judge, along with members from the legal profession or social workers.

Levels of Lok Adalats

State Level: Organized by the Member Secretary of the State Legal Services Authority, consisting of a High Court judge or judicial officer, and other members.

High Court Level: Constituted by the Secretary of the High Court Legal Services Committee, with a High Court judge and other members.

District Level: Organized by the Secretary of the District Legal Services Authority, comprising a district judge or judicial officer, and additional members.

Taluk Level: Organized by the Secretary of the Taluk Legal Services Committee, including a sitting or retired judicial officer and other members.

National and Permanent Lok Adalats

• National Lok Adalat: Held periodically across the country, dealing with a specific subject matter each time, aiming to clear a large number of cases in one day

• Permanent Lok Adalat: Established under Section 22-B of the Act, dealing with public utility services. It has the authority to decide cases even if parties do not reach a settlement, with a jurisdiction limit of up to ₹10 lakhs.

Advantages

Cost-Free: No court fees are required.

Speedy Resolution: Provides a faster resolution compared to traditional courts.

Flexibility: Procedural flexibility allows for a less formal process.

Accessibility: Increases access to justice for marginalized and economically disadvantaged people.

Final and Binding: The decision is final and binding, reducing the likelihood of prolonged litigation.

Critical Analysis

Despite its advantages, the Lok Adalat system faces challenges:

• Reluctance from Lawyers: Some lawyers may resist referring cases to Lok Adalats due to perceived disadvantages.

• Limited Scope: Lok Adalats cannot handle non-compoundable offenses or divorce cases

• Potential Delay: If parties do not reach a settlement, cases are returned to regular courts, causing potential delays.

Suggestions for Improvement

Enhance Legal Literacy: Organize awareness camps and use mass media to educate the public about Lok Adalats.

Improve Quality: Increase remuneration for lawyers providing legal aid to enhance the quality of assistance.

Broaden Jurisdiction: Consider extending the jurisdiction of Lok Adalats to include more types of disputes.

Encourage Voluntary Participation: Foster voluntary involvement in Lok Adalats to reduce the burden on traditional courts.

Conclusion

The Lok Adalat system has significantly contributed to the Indian legal landscape by providing a cost-effective and expeditious alternative to traditional judicial processes. It aligns with the constitutional mandate of ensuring justice and access to all, especially for the disadvantaged. However, continuous improvements and adaptations are necessary to enhance its effectiveness and address current limitations.