Dismissed

Shaikh Hafiz Abdul Nabi v. Mehetab Maheboob Qureshi and Others

Bombay HC10 Dec 2018WP/13652/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition challenging a Lok Adalat award resulting from a compromise between non-petitioner parties, the holding observed that since the petitioner was not a party to the dispute, the award cannot bind them. The petition was dismissed as the award did not affect the petitioner's rights.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; no interference with the Lok Adalat award.

Shaikh Hafiz Abdul Nabi Vs Mehetab Maheboob Qureshi and… — Property and Title | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

wp13652.18-

¶2

-1-

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

 WRIT PETITION NO.13652 OF 2018

¶5

SHAIKH HAFIZ ABDUL NABI

¶6

VERSUS
MEHETAB MAHEBOOB QURESHI AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Shamim Rashid Shaikh

¶8

CORAM : N. M. JAMDAR, J.
 DATED : 10 DECEMBER 2018

¶9

PER COURT:-

¶10

1. By this petition, the petitioner has challenged the award of
the Lok Adalat dated 22 April 2018. It appears that the respondent
Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were parties in Special Civil Suit No. 174 of 2017
filed in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division, Latur. It also
appears that these respondents compromised their suit before the
Lok Adalat and the award of the Lok Adalat was rendered in terms
of the compromise.

¶11

2.Te petitioner, who is not party to the suit or to compromise,
has filed this petition on the ground that there is fraud committed
by these respondents and they have not disclosed that the Regular
Civil Suit No. 695 of 2017 is pending in the court of Civil Judge,
Junior Division, Ausa, which has been filed by the sister of present
respondent No.2 and petitioner is the defendant No.6 in the said

¶12

wp13652.18-

¶13

-2-

¶14

suit, for partition. He submitted that the award of the Lok Adalat
will affect the rights of the petitioner in pending suit.

¶15

3.Te provision of Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities
Act stipulates that every award made by the Lok Adalat is final and
binding on the parties to the dispute. It is obvious that since the
petitioner is not party to the dispute and the compromise, the
compromise cannot bind the petitioner. None of the parties to the
suit have filed objection on the ground of fraud.

¶16

4.It is obvious that since the compromise does not affect the
rights of the petitioner having not been a party, it will not affect the
petitioner's case his substantive rights, if any, in the pending suit.
In view of this position that the petitioner's rights are not affected by
the award, it is not necessary to interfere in this writ petition. Te
petition is accordingly disposed of.

¶17

rlj/

¶18

NOTE: Te order is corrected as per Court's Order dated
 22 December 2018.

Shaikh Hafiz Abdul Nabi v. Mehetab Maheboob Qureshi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Hafiz Abdul Nabi v. Mehetab Maheboob Qureshi and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra Vs Haribhau Baburao Mojad and Anr.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Khandu Umaji Modhave and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra Vs Pandurang Umaji Modhave

Prashant Narayan Karad Vs Urmila Prashant Karad

Yogesh Manoharrao Lad Vs Priyanka Yogesh Lad

Santosh Nanasaheb Gaikwad Vs the Secretary District Level Committee Aurangabad and Chief Executive Officer