Ranjit Singh v. Devinder Singh And Another
!
"
#$$% !& ' !() $$$$$$ !* +* , + !
* ' !() !
!)*
$$$$$$ -!
! .
"
/0 .$ '
1
!!!!
1 2 $
3*45 "#$#
% &' $(# $ ())*$
+ + %
, +
(#) ) $
- + ( - +
$ )) ) )( $(# + ' versus
2021(2) RCR (Civil) 851 versus
RSA No.1265 of 2019
versus
RSA No.25182005 and
versus
! 2015 AIR Punjab and Haryana 130
- !
"
(supra)
#!
"7.
Conjoint reading of Section 16 of the Act with Section 89 of CPC leaves no doubt that endeavor of the legislature is for settlement of cases by alternative disputes settlement mechanism. Be it Lok Adalat or out of Court settlement or Arbitration or Conciliation or Mediation, effort always is to end the litigation once for all times to come. Settlement in terms of Section 89 CPC results in complete end to the litigation. Resort to appeal or revision statutorily is out of the legal arena. Merely because the matter for settlement was not taken up in daily Lok Adalat, which under the aegis of the Haryana State Legal Services Authority, is held every day in each Court in the State after Court hours, should not be taken to the prejudice of the petitionerplaintiff.
16.
Going a step further, it is felt that whether the compromise is with the persuasion of the Court or amongst the parties by themselves in terms of Section 89 CPC or otherwise, invocation of provision of Section 16 of the Act should be made in all cases so that settlements by way of alternative dispute resolution mechanism are encouraged.
17.
Keeping in view the totality of the facts, merely because the matter has not been settled in Lok Adalat, as has been observed by the lower Court while dismissing the application of the plaintiff petitioner, invocation to Section 16 of the Act should not have been refused."
'
. $
$ .) ) %
+ % $
+ % ))
# / 0 #
3 1 5 #$$% 1 2 , 3
4 2 (