Madiga Nagendra v. The Lok Adalat Bench, Rep. Chairman And 2 Others,

HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD Date:19.07.2018 Between:

Madiga Nagendra, S/o Madiga Venkata Ramudu .....Petitioner And:

The Lok Adalat Bench at Adoni, Kurnool District, reptd by its Chairman and two others.

.....Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Mr. T.Kumar Babu Counsel for respondent No.1: Mr. J.Anil Kumar Counsel for respondent No.2: Mr. Kiran Tirumalasetti For Mr. K.V.Raghuveer Counsel for respondent No.3: None appeared The Court made the following:

CVNR, J & GSP, J Dt:19.7.2018 ORDER: (per Hon'ble Sri Justice C.V.Nagarjuna Reddy) This Writ Petition is filed for issue of Certiorari to quash award, dated 16.7.2016, in O.S.No.3 of 2015 on the file of respondent No.1.

We have heard Mr. T.Kumar Babu, learned counsel for the petitioner, Mr. J.Anil Kumar, learned standing counsel for A.P. Legal Services Authority representing respondent No.1 and Mr.

Kiran Tirumalasetti, learned counsel representing Mr. K.V.Raghuveer, learned counsel for respondent No.2, The petitioner pleaded that the land comprising the schedule of the afore-mentioned suit belongs to him; that in the said suit filed by respondent No.2 against respondent No.3 for specific performance of agreement of sale in respect of the land claimed by the petitioner, the latter has filed an application for his impleadment under Order-I Rule-10 C.P.C; that evidently, in collusion with the petitioner's counsel, respondent No.2 has managed to report the said application as not pressed; and that, on the next day itself, the dispute was referred to respondent No.1, which passed the impugned award.

After hearing the learned counsel for all the parties, we are of the opinion that as the petitioner is not a party to the impugned Lok Adalat award, the same would not affect his

CVNR, J & GSP, J Dt:19.7.2018 rights, if any, over the schedule property in respect of which the impugned Lok Adalat award has been passed. If the petitioner so chooses, he is entitled to avail appropriate legal remedies to protect his purported rights over the schedule property and in such event, the impugned Lok Adalat award shall not come in his way.

Subject to these observations, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

As a sequel, order, dated 20.9.2016, is vacated WPMP.No.39294 of 2016 and WVMP.No.4726 of 2017 shall stand dismissed as infructuous.

____________________________ JUSTICE C.V.NAGARJUNA REDDY ______________________________ JUSTICE GUDISEVA SHYAM PRASAD 19th July, 2018 DR