SRINAGAR: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh will decide whether a Pre-Lok Adalat has the authority to pass final and binding orders after staying a maintenance award passed during such proceedings and observing that the challenge raised important jurisdictional questions.
The matter came up before a single bench of Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal in a petition filed by a Srinagar resident challenging an award dated September 4, 2025, passed by the Principal Judge, Family Court Srinagar, during a Pre-Lok Adalat session in proceedings initiated under Section 144 of the BNSS, 2023. The opposite party had sought maintenance of Rs 70,000 per month along with litigation expenses of Rs 5 lakh.
According to court records, the impugned award was passed on the basis of an alleged compromise between the parties, under which the petitioner was directed to pay Rs 20,000 per month as maintenance to the respondent. The award also provided that the respondent would not claim maintenance under the Domestic Violence Act from August 2025 and that the petitioner would bear all expenses relating to the children, including medical care, transport, education and clothing.
Appearing for the petitioner, advocate Shuja Ul Haq submitted that the award was “vitiated by patent lack of jurisdiction” and argued that the proceedings held on September 4, 2025, during a Pre-Lok Adalat session were “merely a conciliatory mechanism intended to facilitate settlement between the parties and not to pass any award.”
Counsel argued that a Pre-Lok Adalat “is not a statutory Lok Adalat within the meaning of Sections 19 to 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and, therefore, lacks the authority to adjudicate disputes or pass final and binding orders.” It was further submitted that the award “does not acquire the status of an award” under Section 21 of the Act and was therefore open to judicial scrutiny.
Referring to the procedure governing Permanent Lok Adalats under Section 22(c) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, counsel further argued that the Family Court had “committed a jurisdictional error in disposing of the entire proceedings during the Pre-Lok Adalat session,” maintaining that the role of such proceedings is limited to facilitating dialogue and settlement between parties. According to the petitioner, disposal of the matter at that stage amounted to “an exercise of power by the Court not vested in it by law.”
Government Advocate Jahingeer Ahmad Dar, who assisted the court as amicus curiae, submitted that Section 9 of the Family Courts Act empowers Family Courts to encourage settlement at any stage and argued that the award passed during the Pre-Lok Adalat session was “in consonance with the aforesaid Act and legally sustainable.”
After hearing the parties, the High Court observed that, “Prima facie, this Court is in agreement with the submissions advanced by Shuja Ul Haq.” The court issued notice and directed respondents to file their response before the next date of hearing.
The High Court also ordered that “there shall be stay of operation of the impugned award dated 04.09.2025” till the next hearing, which has been scheduled for July 15, 2026. (KDC)
