Allowed

The General Manager, Axis Bank Ltd. v. Amit Kumar Basa

Orissa HC13 Jul 2022WP(C)/13317/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court of Orissa allowed the writ petition seeking to set aside an ex-parte award by a Permanent Lok Adalat. The court relied on Supreme Court precedent to quash the award and restore the matter for an attempt at settlement before adjudication, noting the underlying dispute concerned a credit card.

What did the court decide?

Impugned award dated 14th February, 2022 was set aside and quashed, and the matter was restored to the Permanent Lok Adalat for an attempt at settlement.

The General Manager, Axis Bank Ltd. Vs Amit Kumar Basa — Service and Employment | Orissa HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

W.P.(C) No.13317 Of 2022 (Through hybrid mode)

¶3

The General Manager, Axis Bank …. Petitioner Ltd.

¶4

Mr. S.K. Singh, Advocate

¶5

-versus-

¶6

Amit Kumar Basa

¶7

…. Opposite Party

¶8

Mr. A.K. Biswal, Advocate

¶9

CORAM: JUSTICE ARINDAM SINHA

Order No.

ORDER 13.07.2022

1. Mr. Singh, learned advocate appears on behalf of petitionerbank. He submits on reliance of judgment dated 19^th May, 2022 in Civil Appeal no.3872 of 2022 ( Canara Bank v. G S Jayarama ) that impugned award dated 14^th February, 2022 is liable to and should be set aside as it was made ex-parte against his client.

¶14

2. Mr. Biswal, learned advocate appears on behalf of opposite party and submits, ex-parte because inspite of notice petitioner did not cooperate with the Permanent Lok Adalat (PLA) in choosing not to appear before it. He submits, appropriate direction be made for restoration of the matter to the PLA.

¶15

Page 1 of 1

¶16

// 2 //

¶17

3. In paragraph-26 of Canara Bank (supra) (Live Law print) the Supreme Court said, inter alia, the PLA based on material before it shall propose terms of settlement and communicate them to both parties, regardless whether they participated in the proceedings. If the party present before the Permanent Lok Adalat does not agree or if the absent party does not respond in a sufficient period of time, only then can the Permanent Lok Adalat adjudicate the dispute on its merits under section 22-C(8) in Legal Services Act, 1987. The Supreme Court went on to say, keeping in mind the principles enshrined in section 22-D, the PLA shall once again notify the absent party of its decision to adjudicate the dispute on its merits, in case it

¶18

wishes to join the proceedings at that stage.

¶19

4. Impugned award is set aside and quashed. The matter is restored to the PLA for attempt at settlement, failing which adjudication. The purpose of notice regarding terms of possible settlement formulated by the PLA stands satisfied since petitioner has impugned the award, in which the terms had been stated. Petitioner is hereby put on notice that it may either still respond to those terms, for settlement or join in the restored proceeding before the PLA for adjudication of the dispute.

¶20

Page 2 of 3

¶21

// 3 //

¶22

5. The dispute appears to be regarding a credit card issued by petitioner to opposite party. Opposite party says the card was never activated. Petitioner in the writ petition has not asserted it was. As such there does not appear to be dispute, atleast on that the card was not activated. This finding is prima facie and petitioner will be entitled to adduce evidence regarding activation of the card, before the PLA.

¶23

6. Parties or either of them will produce this order before the PLA, for resuming the proceeding from stage of attempting settlement between the parties and thereafter adjudication, if it fails, in light of directions made above.

¶24

7. The writ petition is disposed of.

¶25

(Arindam Sinha) Judge

¶26

Sks

¶27

Page 3 of 3

The General Manager, Axis Bank Ltd. v. Amit Kumar Basa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The General Manager, Axis Bank Ltd. v. Amit Kumar Basa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Bm,India First Life Insurance Comp.Ltd. Vs Sabita Nahak

Bm,India First Life Insurance Company Ltd. Vs Raj Kishore Nayak

Nilachakra Constn. Vs State

Ananta Charan Sahoo Vs Land Acquisition Officer

Narendra Samal Vs State of Odisha

M/S Gammon Engineers and Contractors Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Odisha