The Andhra Pradesh High Court has ruled that a Lok Adalat award remains valid and executable even if the Decree Holder fails to withdraw a separate suit against a third party, as stipulated in the terms of the compromise. Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari dismissed a Civil Revision Petition challenging the execution of an award, clarifying that the finality of a Lok Adalat award involving specific parties is not vitiated by proceedings in a distinct suit involving different defendants and causes of action.
Case Background
The matter arose from Civil Revision Petition No. 2928 of 2025, filed by Nethipadi Swarnalatha (Petitioner/Judgment Debtor) against Maradana Seshagiri Rao (Respondent/Decree Holder).
The Respondent had originally filed O.S.No.215 of 2021 on the file of the VI Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Visakhapatnam. The suit was resolved amicably, and a Lok Adalat award was passed on 12.11.2022 based on a compromise entered into between the parties. Subsequently, the Respondent filed E.P.No.226 of 2023 under Order XXI, Rules 54, 64 to 66 of the Code of Civil Procedure to execute the award as a decree of the Court. The Petitioner challenged the order of the Execution Court, leading to the present revision before the High Court.
Arguments of the Parties
The counsel for the Petitioner, Sri T.S.B.V. Rama Reddy, contended that the execution petition was not maintainable due to a breach of the compromise terms.
The Petitioner’s primary argument relied on Clause (3) of the settlement agreement recorded in the Lok Adalat award. According to the Petitioner, the Respondent had agreed to “not press” another suit, O.S.No.220 of 2022, which was pending before the III Additional Junior Civil Judge, Visakhapatnam, against the Petitioner’s brother. The specific date fixed for not pressing the suit was 03.11.2022.
The counsel submitted that contrary to the agreement, the Respondent did not withdraw O.S.No.220 of 2022, and that suit was eventually dismissed on merits rather than being “not pressed.” The Petitioner argued that this failure to honor Clause (3) rendered the Lok Adalat award in O.S.No.215 of 2021 inexecutable.
Court’s Analysis and Observations
Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari heard the submissions and examined the relationship between the two suits. The Court noted that O.S.No.215 of 2021 (the subject of the Lok Adalat award) and O.S.No.220 of 2022 were distinct proceedings.
Upon a specific query from the Court, the Petitioner’s counsel admitted that O.S.No.220 of 2022 was filed against the Petitioner’s brother, not the Petitioner herself, and was based on “different promissory notes.”
The Court observed that the subject matter and the defendants in the two suits were different. Consequently, the Court held that the compromise regarding the present suit was binding between the Petitioner and the Respondent, regardless of the outcome or procedural history of the other suit.
In a key observation regarding the enforceability of the award, Justice Tilhari stated:
“The Lok Adalat award based on compromise is final and binding between the plaintiff/respondent and the present petitioner/defendant, which cannot be said to be inexecutable.”
Addressing the specific contention regarding the failure to withdraw the second suit, the Court held:
“This Court is of the view that even if the plaintiff/decree holder in O.S.No.225 of 2021 did not, not press, another suit i.e. O.S.No.220 of 2022, in terms of clause (3) of the compromise in the Lok Adalat award, that would not disentitle him for execution of the award passed in O.S.No.215 of 2021.”
Decision
The High Court found no illegality in the order of the Execution Court. The Civil Revision Petition was dismissed, and the Court made no order as to costs. All pending interlocutory applications were closed as a sequel to the order.
Case Details:
- Case Title: Nethipadi Swarnalatha vs. Maradana Seshagiri Rao
- Case Number: Civil Revision Petition No. 2928 of 2025
- Court: Andhra Pradesh High Court
- Judge: Justice Ravi Nath Tilhari
