CHAPTER-IX: CONCLUSION

AND SUGGESTIONS

I. CONCLUSION:

Amicable settlement is sine qua non for the smooth function of society.
From the inception of society clash between two different groups seems turning
point of social order. For the settlement of disputes the society invented their
own dispute settlement mechanism as per their requirement. As per the
development of society the new controversies and disputes arose between the
people which lead towards rapid and speedy disposal. For the settlement of their
disputes the civilised society invented various new and innovative methods.

In ancient period there was no progressive mechanism for dispute

settlement. The dispute settlement mechanism was based on the verdict and
choice of panchas or headman (Mukhiya). The judge had enormous and
discretionary power to settle the dispute between two groups. The decision was
based on the principle of Dharma rather principle accepted by the society. With
the passing of time those judges have been replaced by new and effective
methods invented after the requirement of time. The dispute resolution
mechanism through mutual consideration is not altogether new. Its roots are
deeply embedded in pre Vedic period.

From the inception of society amicable settlement of dispute was

prevalent in India. Society makes efforts for making the life cheap, easy, snug
and easy access to the justice. This endeavour of mankind shows realisation of
the human being for good life. But at the same time law constantly plays an
imperative role in every progress. The law was present in ancient period in the
form of rules, ethics, culture, thoughts and afterwards in terms of Dharma.

The principle of law was based and developed through the principle of
Dharma. Dharma provides various duties which are essential for human
civilization and its progress. The ancient judicial system rather dispute resolution
mechanism is based on these principles of Dharma. The principles of Dharma

259
were strictly followed and implemented by the society and the same proved very
effective for dispute settlement. The principle of Dharma was interpreted
according to existing situation and dispute which proved very effective for
common people. Furthermore, it is not erroneous to articulate that this antique
organization made significant contribution for developing the judicial system for
amicable settlement of dispute at village level. These village level organizations
afterward prospered as Panchayats which were unceremonious institutions for
harmonious settlement of dispute between the people.

The various methods were used in ancient period like as mediation,

negotiation arbitration for settlement of dispute through the headman. These
methods were known by different name. It is pertinent to note here that most of
the time neutral third party also actively participated in dispute settlement
mechanism as a judge in the meticulous clash. The core object of these
institutions was to reduce the gap and complications between the parties with the
help of various amicable methods. The concept of cordial settlement was
overcome with passing of time. As the mentality of the society changed, people
resorted to seek justice by the litigation tried in the regular court which functions
on rigid and complicated procedural laws.

The concept of amicable settlement within the village was invented with
human evolution and developed with human social advancement. This system
was flourished with the development of civilised society and new laws were
introduced throughout the globe. Taking in to consideration the overall
development of amicable settlement of dispute at global level new methods were
invented with new progressive procedure which seems more effective and
healthy for overall development of society. The new and effective methods
invented at global level proved more beneficial for India as well.

The access to speedy and cheap justice is right of every person enshrined
under Constitution of India and the same is guaranteed under Part III of
constitution. Part III of the constitution provides fundamental rights to every
citizen. Taking inspiration from the part III legislature provided ample provision
of laws which provides justice for all. Additionally, the Parliament has passed the

260
law in regards to provide amicable settlement of disputes. The main object of
every legal system is to provide justice with effective cost and less efforts by the
public. Accessing justice at minimum cost is the sine qua non for the existence of
a democratic and civilized state. The prime functions of a welfare state are to
provide adequate dispute-resolution mechanisms. Considering the prevailing
situation, population and complexity of existing laws and limited resources it is
very difficult for common people to ‘access to justice’ on minimum cost within
limited period. The judicial system in India has been burdened with insuperable
arrears, flawed by a poor judge to population ratio and attended with procedural
difficulty, intrinsic impediment and soaring expenses. This thrust the search for
new alternatives and the result was the introduction of the ADR in its existing
modern personification. Certainly over these years ADR has shown to be one of
the most capable solutions which have been supporter to counter the problems
faced by the justice delivery system.

For providing cheap and effective judicial remedy for poor and needy
people the new instrument was introduced in the form of Constitution. The vision
and mission of fundamental law is to promote and establish a Welfare State for
overall development of human being. As India has been facing various problems
such as social and economic inequality, particularly the situation is very miserable
in economics. Getting food for a day has very difficult for common man and for
the reason he does not think to get justice or rights. For the common man the
words like justice, rights etc are fiery and fanciful terminologies. Socially also
India has been facing a number of problems which can be sorted out by cheap and
speedy judicial remedies. There are social inequalities and all the vulnerable
sections of the society such as women, dalits, and children are deprived of basic
means of living.

For the security and encouragement of this function Part III of the
Constitution of India secures to its citizens “fundamental rights” which can be
enforced directly in the High Courts and Supreme Court of India by issue of
prerogative writs under Articles 226 and 32 respectively. At the same time Part IV
of the Indian Constitution lays down “Directive Principles of State Policy” which

261
are not enforceable by any court but are nevertheless fundamental in the
governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the state to apply these
principles while making laws. It is seen that the Indian legal system has developed
and changed with the existence and objectives of its people and its mixed cultures,
religious practices and personal laws. The Indian legal system is founded and
encouraged by ancient concepts and principles of justice, equity and good
conscience, which are, indeed, the symbols of common law. The aim of all these
provisions is to give justice to its all citizen without any discrimination. For the
social justice to all, the constitution in its preamble made it clear that the
government is bound to provide justice to every citizen.

For achieving the concept of social justice, the State takes some steps with
object to eradicate disparity among citizens. Everyone should get equal
opportunity in social affairs as well as economic activities. The term "Justice”
without doubt means justice to the deprived and weaker sections of society
bringing an egalitarian order under which opportunities are afforded to the weaker
sections of society.281 It means everyone should be facilitated for promotion and
protection of their rights guaranteed by the constitution of India. The social justice
can be achieved through the Preamble and Article 38 of the Constitution of India.
The social justice can be achieved through ensuring life to be meaningful and
liveable with human dignity.

Fundamental rights, known as basic human rights, are guaranteed under

part III of the constitution of India for securing the fair justice for all. The
Fundamental rights proved very essential. Fundamental rights are read along with
the Directive Principles of State Policy and the Fundamental Duties enshrined in
Article 51A. The purpose of fundamental rights is to protect and promote
individual liberty and democratic philosophy based on equality of all members of
the society. At the same time one must bear in mind that these rights are not
absolute and are subject to reasonable restrictions. The Fundamental Rights could
be amended and they are subject to judicial review. Only providing sufficient right
is not enough unless it can be guaranteed through judicial verdict. The courts

281
Punjab National bank Vs. Gulam Dastagir AIR 1978 SC 481

262
always try to interpret the rights guaranteed for the welfare of people. The Indian
judicial system provides comprehensive protection to the individual in case of
violation of fundamental rights.

Although, the courts are bound to protect the people against the violation of
rights but in fact the Indian courts are over-burdened by pendency of cases.
Amidst rigid procedure, complicated laws and scarcity of judges it is very difficult
for common and poor people to get justice. In this difficult situation Alternative
Dispute Resolution i.e. ADR prove very significant attractive mean for dispute
resolution with minimum efforts and cost.

The ADR was a historic requirement in a country like India where illiteracy
conquered about all aspects of governance. The most desired function of ADR
may seem to be clearing the backlog of millions of pending cases in Indian courts.
At the same times the other functions of ADR cannot be ignored. The concept of
ADR has been a success in practice.

ADR plays a very important role to advance and support “equal access to
justice”, the heart of the constitution of India. This Indian contribution to world
ADR jurisprudence needs to be taken full advantage. Maximum numbers of ADR
need to be organized to achieve the Gandhian Principles of Gram Swaraj and
“access to justice for all”. During the last few years, ADR has been found to be a
successful tool of alternate dispute resolution in India. It is most popular and
effective because of its innovative nature and inexpensive style. The system
received wide acceptance not only from the litigants, but from the public and legal
functionaries in general.

ADR has, undoubtedly, been successful in clearing the dockets in India.

In certain countries of the world ADR has been successful to the extent that over
90 percent of the cases are settled out of the court. Therefore, the system of ADR
and giving free legal aid to eligible persons is a very noble one which has helped
judiciary not only in speedy disposal of cases but has given some relief to the
litigant, particularly to them who are poor and cannot afford to claim their right
through court of law.

263
 Lok Adalat is emerging and dynamic method of dispute settlement for
common and poor people. The idea and philosophy behind is very old and richly
developed through modifications in tradition. Lok Adalat is proved to be well and
improved option for dispute resolution. Several disputes like compensation claims,
partition, family disputes, land disputes and other alike disputes are sort out by the
Lok Adalat effectively.

For the promotion of social justice for poor and needy people the new
Act was emerged. This Act provided free and competent legal services to the
weaker sections of the society to ensure that opportunities for securing justice are
not denied to any citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities and to
organize Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes
justice on a basis of equal opportunity.282 As the purpose was not fulfilled the Act
was amended in 2002. The new amended Act provides competence as well
effective method of amicable settlement by establishing permanent Lok Adalat.
All the methods which are defined under Legal Services Authority Act for
amicable settlement play vital role for providing the justice to all. The aim of all
judicial wings is to provide speedy and cheap justice. Various methods which are
used for the amicable settlement of disputes seem fruitful for particular judicial
decisions.
By the time, different States were engaged in introducing the various
schemes for legal aid. On 26th September, 1980 the Central Government appointed
a committee under the chairpersonship of Justice Bhagwati for implementation of
the scheme of free legal aid to poor and needy people. This committed was known
as a Committee for Implementation of Legal Aid Scheme (CILAS). This
committee organized various Lok Adalat at different places of the country for poor
and needy people. In 1987, the Legal Services Authorities Act was enacted to give
a statutory base to legal aid programmes.

From the ongoing discussion one thing is clear that, Lok Adalat and ADR
play very effective and significant role in India for amicable settlement of dispute.
It is proved that, the Lok Adalat is not concerned with civil disputes only. The Lok

282
See the preamble of Legal Service Authority Act, 1987

264
Adalat has jurisdiction to entertain the criminal disputes too. Additionally after the
amendment Act 2002 the scope of the Legal Service Authority Act was expanded.
The new and effective mechanism was provided in the form of Permanent Lok
Adalat. Though, the law provided some effective measures and provisions for
working of Lok Adalat and ADR, still there is need to make more effective
provisions for the same.

There are certain lapses in the present model of Lok Adalat and ADR.
The numbers of queries and doubts are being raised by eminent personalities in the
field. In order to achieve socio-economic justice and to boost the utility of any
judicial system there are definite challenges. The challenges before Lok-Adalat
and ADR are crucial as well as rudimentary.

To achieve socio-economic justice and to boost the utility of any judicial

system, as a research student, as a member of the society, as a vigilant citizen of
Free India, the researcher has query and lots of questions in the mind such as-

• The legal service providers in the rural and tribal area have no particular
model before them.
• One cannot fix the land rights of the poor particularly when he has not
document (pattas) of the land he has in possession.
• One is not sure to seek help from particular body or forum to be protected
from exploitation of such rights as water rights, forest rights etc
• The government sponsored schemes such as food, sanitation, health,
employment, etc. usually meant for reducing the gap or reducing the
misery of the poor people, but the very people do not get what is
exclusively meant for them.
• Even after the strict law, the cases of atrocities against scheduled castes and
scheduled tribes are rampant, especially in villages.
• The process of preservation and protection of traditional knowledge and
other intellectual property rights of rural poor urgently needs serious
concern.
• The question of bio-diversity of rural and tribal areas is inattentive.

265
 • The plight of farmers is alarming. Along with the check in dismal
happenings of farmers’ suicide, the monopoly of profit-hungry
multinational companies who sell seeds, pesticides to farmers, has to be
prevented by definite law machinery.
• The State agencies like police, forest officials, bank, revenue officials etc
many a times exploit the villagers. The people are helpless and not sure to
which judicial machinery they should seek help from.
• Last but not the least the problems relating to family and its solidarity,
consumers, employments cannot ignore.

These are the questions which require immediate and concrete solutions
under present scenario. There is no doubt that all such questions have their
solution with judiciary in alternative delivery system and that too in Lok-Adalat
system. But this system needs to be improvised.

The researcher wishes to mention here that -

“The concept of seeking justice cannot be equated with the

value of dollars. Money plays no role in seeking justice.”

-
Justice Blackmun in Jackson v. Bish.

266
II. RECOMMENDATIONS :
To improve the working, utility and efficiency of Lok-Adalat mechanism
as one mode of ADR to achieve socio-economic justice, followings are the
concrete recommendation –

In this 21st Century, it is reality that the mass population is still poor and
illiterate. In any Welfare State, it is the demand for socio justice that such
population should be educated on their basic, fundamental rights. This
awareness should be done from the grass root level of the country. With
active judiciary, support from state administration, NSS camps of the
colleges, Legal Awareness Clinics at Law Colleges, NGO, print and digital
media, rulers groups, even social activist film media etc. must be made
available to conduct legal literacy programme on the large scale. One should
go in the periphery, should conduct the camps in the local languages by
adopting their culture and living etiquettes, during their religious
ceremonies, in Jatras, hats with the help of street plays, folk dances, folk
music, in Maharashtra powade, shahiri.

To acclaim the demand for economic justice, more focus must be on Legal
Aid. In this present scenario, when we want to reduce the gap between haves
and have-nots. In this regards, the multinational companies must be aware
with their corporate social responsibility and must provide the fund to such
activities of the State. Exemptions and concessions in the taxes should be
considered to the donations given by the companies and other Tax-payers for
Legal Aid movement and to organise Lok-Adalats.

Free Legal Services Authorities must be provided with sufficient funds by

the State because no one should be deprived of advices either professional or
due to lack of funds because no one should be deprived of professional
advice and advice due to lack of funds. To eliminate social and structural
discrimination, Free Legal Service is one of the important tools in bringing
about distributive justice.

267
As a member of a family, the researcher felt that appropriate and punctual
priority must be given to redress the matrimonial disputes. The family peace
and its solidarity need to be maintained. Through the Lok-Adalat much
responsibility must be drawn on the family courts, conciliators. It is
proposed that community leaders, teachers, doctors or even industrialists will
be preferred as panel members. There will be different physiological impact
on the behaviour of both the parties.

During the course of research and study, as well as a panel member it is

observed that the Government is the largest litigant and if the Government
departments themselves take initiative to settle disputes by way of
compromise, it will give tremendous boost to Lok Adalat movement. It must
be made mandatory to all cases to be filed by the State (as defined in Article
12 of the Constitution) to be referred to Lok Adalat initially. One more point
in this connection is that as far as the ‘State’ is concerned, the officials
representing the ‘State are not in a position to agree for the proposal
immediately because such powers are not delegated to them. In such cases,
either the competent authority at higher level should attend the Lok Adalat or
suitable powers/authority can be delegated.

Disputes relating to consumer, labour, accidental claims, family matters,

trifling disputes relating to land and encroachment, wages claims, municipal
claims, compoundable offences, traffic offences, etc. must be referred
mandatorily before the conciliators attached with Lok-Adalat. Sometimes,
the disputes may arise because of ego only and that must be resolved within
time. This can be achieved by restraining themselves from invoking the
jurisdiction of traditional Courts in trifle disputes.

The slogan ‘Justice delayed is Justice denied’ is one of the causes of the
emergence of ADR modes, but after critically analysing the concept of Lok-
Adalat, again as a panel member, every time it is felt that the concept of
Lok-Adalat must not be failed because of one another slogan, i.e., ‘Justice
hurried is Justice burried. To get rid from this drawback, as a panel
member, I recommend that the data, details and essential information and

268
matters regarding the cases referred must be provided in advance to the panel
members for proper scrutiny and analysis. So that, their roles in the
settlement process become active and supportive also. They must be
properly motivated, trained and remunerated suitably.

Recently, Law Commission proposed many amendments in the Advocate

Act, 1961 especially regarding the role of BCI. The Bar Council of India,
Bar Council of States and Bar Associations must be made responsible to
create legal awareness in the society. It must be made statutory that one of
the main functions of such bodies must be to arrange camps, seminar,
conferences and symposiums at every nukkad, mundi, jails, gram-panchayat,
public places especially in rural, tribal areas for marginalised sections. More
responsibilities must be shouldered on them to go and create legal awareness
in interior places. The Bar Council of India must spread legal aid and legal
awareness activities in rural areas with the collaboration of NGOs, self-
government authorities, collectorates, legal aid committee and school and
colleges also.

Proper panels must be maintained. Proper training to all those panel

members regarding arbitration, conciliation, mediation and negotiation must
be given. Because, the concept of Lok-Adalat is the combination of all those
ADR modes. We can have benefit of the merits of those ADR modes
through the Lok-Adalat.

As an academician attached with legal education, it can be recommended

that it must be compulsory for all law students appearing in the last semester
to render services as a volunteers for legal awareness, to study and analysis
the cases of Lok-Adalat at least for six months. For this
internship/practical/project must be included in law syllabi of all universities
and proper credit must be given to those practical/projects. Because every
university has court-centric law curriculum, which produces law graduates
unfit to serve the justice needs of the tribal and rural communities. This will
be more benefited to Lok-Adalat institution and to the budding advocates
also. Experimental learning through clinical courses can be developed.

269
One of the major drawbacks is lack of funding to support this mission. It is
the duty of the State to create legal awareness, so the State must make proper
budget for such legal awareness activities. For this, there must be provision
to constitute, run and work an Authorised Legal Awareness Centre (ALAC)
at Law colleges with proper funding. If such duty is to be performed by the
law colleges regarding the legal awareness then such colleges must be
financially supported by the State. This will have a good impact on the
society.

There must be proper scrutiny and review process in case the award passed
in favour of women, children and illiterate class. There may be least chances
to exploit them.

There is need to establish separate Bar or Registration for conciliators,

mediators, volunteers as well for Lok Adalat as a panel members.
One of the shortcomings of our traditional judicial system is that there is a
huge pendency of cases; the only panacea is establishment of more and more
permanent Lok Adalats that is on the varied matters. To lower the burden on
the judiciary and have speedy disposal, the expertise of the retired judicial
officers could be effectively utilized in resolution of matters by conciliation.

To have common people’s response, a new concept ‘Lawyer-free Lok-

Adalat’ can be experimented and the response of the common people can be
realized

It is important that all documents and information about the working of the
Lok-Adalat are to be published in the major Indian and foreign languages
through print media as well digital media.

Need to developed separate digital wings as a unit for effective ADR system.
It could be possible to resolve the disputes through digital method to avoid
drawbacks of face to face contact. This online platform is good to resolve
commercial disputes in particular.

270
 Last but not least, The Lok Adalat Movement can be successful only if the
people participate on voluntary basis in the functioning of Lok Adalat. The
Researcher wants to propose one out of box suggestions that with the Legal
Awareness Camps, efforts must be taken to arrange various camps such as
Medical and Health Awareness Camps, Make-in-India Camps, Digital India
Camps, Education Camps, Swachch-Bharat Camp (Pollution, Garbage and
Corruption Free India), Beti Bachao-Beti Padhao Camp in all over parts of
India. So large number of varied population can be attracted, approached,
benefited. We can create, make, build, develop, advance and proceed
towards India as a Welfare State marching towards full employment,
healthy-wealthy and amicable society.

After comparing the lok-Adalat with other ADR mode, we can conclude that
the institution of Lok Adalat has a better utility in the context of the typical Indian
society. Lok Adalat acts as a forum for speedy and equitable justice, where any of
the sections can approach to resolve his dispute in speedy and inexpensive manner
and to his own satisfaction.

The overall functioning and achievement of Lok Adalat appears though not
remarkable but to be appreciable. So there is a need to strengthen the system of
Lok Adalat in recent context, which in turn, helps to realize the Constitutional
goals of ‘equal and social justice’ to its fullest extent. It will, in turn, will be
helpful to regain and to reaffirm the public confidence in the judiciary.

271