The Powers of a Lok Adalat, and the Court Fee That Comes Back

This is what frees a Lok Adalat from the Code of Civil Procedure's structure of pleadings, issues, evidence and arguments. There is no plaint, no written statement, no framing of issues, and no examination-in-chief. The bench talks to the parties.

Compare section 22D, which does the same job for a Permanent Lok Adalat but goes further: it says in terms that the Permanent Lok Adalat shall be guided by the principles of natural justice, objectivity, fair play and equity, and shall not be bound by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 and the Indian Evidence Act 1872. Chapter 150 works that through. The reason for the extra words is that a Permanent Lok Adalat may decide, and a body that decides must be told which rules it is free from.

Section 22(3): judicial proceedings, and a civil court for two purposes

All proceedings before a Lok Adalat or Permanent Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be judicial proceedings within the meaning of sections 193, 219 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code 1860, and every such body shall be deemed to be a civil court for the purpose of section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973.

Unpack that, because a bare recital of section numbers is worth little.

Section 193 of the Penal Code punishes giving or fabricating false evidence in a judicial proceeding. So a person who lies on oath before a Lok Adalat commits perjury.

Section 219 punishes a public servant who corruptly makes an order or judgment he knows to be contrary to law. So a member of the bench is exposed to the same liability as a judge.

Section 228 punishes intentional insult or interruption to a public servant sitting in a judicial proceeding. So a party who abuses the bench is not beyond reach.

Section 195 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and Chapter XXVI together control how a prosecution for those offences may be launched: not on a private complaint, but on a complaint by the court concerned. Deeming the Lok Adalat a civil court for that purpose is what lets it set the process in motion.

The Acts named are the ones the section names, and both have since been replaced, by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023. Section 22(3) has not been redrafted, so read it with the general rule that a reference to a repealed enactment is read as a reference to the corresponding provision of the new one. Cite the section as it stands, and note the successor legislation rather than substituting numbers you have not checked.

What section 22(3) does not do is turn a Lok Adalat into a court for all purposes. It is a limited deeming, for the offences and the procedure named, and State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh is the answer to anybody who reads it more widely.

The court fee refund, in section 21(1)

The refund is worth its own treatment, because it is the incentive that fills a Lok Adalat.

Section 21(1) provides that where a compromise or settlement has been arrived at by a Lok Adalat in a case referred to it under section 20(1), the court fee paid in such case shall be refunded in the manner provided under the Court Fees Act 1870.

Court fee is the sum a litigant pays to the State to file a case, usually calculated on the value of the claim, and in a substantial suit it is a large amount of money.

Three points follow.

It applies to a pending case only. Section 20(1) is the reference of a case already filed. In a pre-litigation matter under section 20(2), nothing was filed and no fee was paid, so nothing is refunded.

The whole fee comes back, not a part of it, and the mechanism is the Court Fees Act 1870.

It is a real inducement. A plaintiff who settles at a Lok Adalat recovers the fee he has already spent, which effectively reduces the cost of the settlement.

Note that section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure has its own refund provision for cases it sends out to any of the alternative processes. Chapter 600 works through section 89.

A worked example

Ravindra sued a transport company for Rs. 12,00,000 for goods lost in transit and paid court fee on that amount. The suit was referred to a Lok Adalat under section 20(1). At the Lok Adalat the company says it will pay something once it sees the delivery records, which are with a third party godown keeper who has not been served.

Can the Lok Adalat get the records? Yes. Section 22(1)(b) gives it the civil court's power of discovery and production of documents, and section 22(1)(d) lets it requisition a public record or document from any court or office.

Can it compel the godown keeper to attend? Section 22(1)(a) gives it the power of summoning and enforcing the attendance of a witness and examining him on oath.

If the godown keeper lies on oath, what happens? Section 22(3) deems the proceeding a judicial proceeding within the meaning of section 193 of the Penal Code, so he can be prosecuted for false evidence, and the prosecution is launched through the section 195 route because the Lok Adalat is deemed a civil court for that purpose.

Suppose the records show the loss and the company still refuses to pay anything. The Lok Adalat cannot order it to pay. Regulation 9 forbids any direction or order, and Jalour Singh holds that an imposed order is void. No award is made, and under section 20(5) the record goes back to the civil court.

Suppose instead they settle at Rs. 9,00,000. The award is deemed a decree under section 21(1), and Ravindra's court fee on the Rs. 12,00,000 suit is refunded under the Court Fees Act 1870.

Distinctions worth keeping straight

What beginners get wrong

Section 22 does not give a Lok Adalat the powers of a civil court generally. It gives the civil court's powers in respect of five listed matters, all of them about getting witnesses and documents.

"Deemed to be judicial proceedings" is limited to three Penal Code sections. It does not make the Lok Adalat a court at large.

Having power to specify its own procedure is not power to decide. Read section 22(2) with regulation 9.

The refund of court fee is not available in every Lok Adalat matter. Only where the case was referred under section 20(1).

Quick revision

• Section 22(1): the powers of a civil court under the Code of Civil Procedure in respect of (a) summoning and enforcing attendance of a witness and examining him on oath, (b) discovery and production of documents, (c) reception of evidence on affidavits, (d) requisitioning public records, and (e) other prescribed matters.
• Section 22(2): power to specify its own procedure.
• Section 22(3): proceedings are judicial proceedings for sections 193, 219 and 228 of the Indian Penal Code, and the body is a civil court for section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Both those Codes have since been replaced by the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 2023 and the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita 2023.
• The section applies to a Permanent Lok Adalat too, by the substitution made by Act 37 of 2002.
• Section 21(1): court fee is refunded under the Court Fees Act 1870 where a settlement is reached in a case referred under section 20(1).
• Regulation 9 of the NALSA (Lok Adalats) Regulations 2009: the power is only to help the parties to a compromise, and no direction or order may be issued.

Test yourself

1. Name the five matters in which a Lok Adalat has the powers of a civil court. Summoning and enforcing the attendance of a witness and examining him on oath; discovery and production of any document; reception of evidence on affidavits; requisitioning any public record or document or a copy from any court or office; and such other matters as may be prescribed.

2. A witness gives false evidence before a Lok Adalat. Can he be prosecuted? Yes. Section 22(3) deems the proceeding a judicial proceeding within the meaning of section 193 of the Indian Penal Code, and deems the Lok Adalat a civil court for section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which govern how such a prosecution is launched.

3. Does the power to specify its own procedure let a Lok Adalat decide a dispute? No. Section 22(2) is about procedure. Regulation 9 of the NALSA (Lok Adalats) Regulations 2009 confines the power to helping the parties reach a compromise and forbids any direction or order, and State of Punjab v. Jalour Singh holds that a Lok Adalat has no adjudicatory function.

4. When is court fee refunded, and when is it not? It is refunded under section 21(1), in the manner provided by the Court Fees Act 1870, where a compromise or settlement is arrived at in a case referred under section 20(1), that is, a pending case. It does not arise in a pre-litigation matter under section 20(2), where no case was filed and no fee paid.

5. How does section 22D differ from section 22(2), and why? Section 22(2) gives both bodies power to specify their own procedure. Section 22D goes further for a Permanent Lok Adalat, requiring it to be guided by natural justice, objectivity, fair play, equity and other principles of justice, and providing that it is not bound by the Code of Civil Procedure 1908 or the Indian Evidence Act 1872. The extra provision is needed because a Permanent Lok Adalat may decide a dispute on merits, and a body that decides must be told which rules of procedure and evidence bind it.