Application of Section 89 CPC extends to disputes settled outside courts, encompassing proceedings before the Rent Control Court: Kerala High Court

Case: Sindhu A.K. v. Nizar Kochery

Coram: Justice P.B. Suresh Kumar and Justice Johnson John

Case No.: OP (RC) NO. 39 OF 2023

Court Observation: “In other words, if a matter referred by the Rent Control Court to a Lok Adalat is settled at the Lok Adalat, an award passed by the Lok Adalat in relation to the matters covered by the Act, as also matters not covered by the Act, but brought before the Lok Adalat by the parties, can certainly be enforced in the light of the provisions contained in the 1987 Act,”

“Yet another reason for us to take this view is that alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are now considered, having regard to the challenges faced by the justice delivery system in place, especially the huge pendency, as the appropriate dispute resolution mechanisms…The huge pendency of the rent control matters and the time taken by courts for disposal of the same also prompt us to hold that alternative dispute resolution mechanisms shall be made applicable to the proceedings under the Act”.

Previous Posts

Efficient judicial functioning is jeopardized when parties are permitted to backtrack from their commitments without providing any justifiable reasons, as emphasized by the Delhi High Court

J&K High Court stresses that Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be interpreted in line with the fundamental right to life and liberty guaranteed under Article 21

Delhi High Court Orders Litigant Claiming Ownership of Territory Between Ganga and Yamuna from Agra to Gurugram to Pay ₹10,000 in Costs

Calcutta High Court states that arranging groups in the tender process with clear distinctions is acceptable; it shouldn’t be criticized just because it may not be convenient for all bidders

In cases under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the prosecution must independently prove the ‘Pendency of Official Favour,’ without relying on external support: AP High Court