Page No.# 1/5 GAHC030003452025 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : WP(C)/57/2025 Sh. Rualkhuma Ralte S/o R. Laltanpuia (L) R/o Hualngohmun, Aizawl District, Mizoram VERSUS State of Mizoram, R/b the Secretary Home Department and 2 Ors. Govt. of Mizoram, Aizawl, Mizoram 2:The Officer-in-Charge 3:Sh. C. Lalrawn Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr Lalchhanliana Khiangte Advocate for the Respondent : Addl. AG/GA, Mizoram for R 1&2 BEFORE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE MARLI VANKUNG ORDER Date : 17-11-2025 Heard Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for private respondent No. 3 and Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte, learned Government for the State respondents. Page No.# 2/5 2. The instant writ petition is filed challenging the order dated 10.05.2025 passed by the Lok Adalat in Lok Adalat (Pre) Case No. 114/2025. 3. Mr. Lalchhanliana Khiangte, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the private respondent No. 3 had filed a complaint before the Lok Adalat regarding a dispute relating to landing of money, wherein, the instant petitioner was said to have borrowed a sum of Rs. 25,00,000/- from the respondent No. 3 on 05.07.2023 for repayment of the said amount with an interest amounting to Rs. 25,00,000/- on or before 05.08.2023. However, since the petitioner had not repaid the said amount, the respondent No. 3 had approached the Lok Adalat for the recovery of his money with interest by stating that the petitioner had mortgaged his Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator, Model No. PC210-10Mo, M/C Sl. No. N730953 and his Periodic Patta No. 105203/10/779 of 2010. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner had appeared before Lok Adalat sittings were held twice during the month of March and April and the next date for appearance before the Lok Adalat was fixed on 10.05.2025. The petitioner could not appear before the Lok Adalat on 10.05.2025 due to certain difficulties whereby the respondent No. 3 who was the complainant in the Lok Adalat (Pre) case, had withdrawn his complaint as he preferred to approach the Civil Court. 4. Accordingly, the Lok Adalat (Pre Litigation) Case was dismissed on withdrawal on 10.05.2025, however, the Lok Adalat vide the impugned order dated 10.05.2025 had directed the respondent No. 2 i.e., the Officer-in-Charge, Kulikawn Police Station to detain the petitioner’s Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator, Model No. PC210-10Mo, M/C Sl. No. N730953 for the safe and proper custody of the Police Station until any order passed by the Civil Court. The key of the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator, Model No. PC210-10Mo, M/C Sl. No. N730953 was Page No.# 3/5 seized by the respondent No. 2. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the Lok Adalat had acted beyond its jurisdiction in detaining the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator, Model No. PC210-10Mo, M/C Sl. No. N730953, since the respondent No. 3 who was the complainant in the Lok Adalat Pre Litigation case had already withdrawn his complaint before the Lok Adalat and that the order of the Lok Adalat is in gross violation of the post conferred by Section 19(5) of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 and Section 9 of the National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulation, 2009. 6. Mr. S. Vanlalhriata, learned counsel for the private respondent No. 3 submits that he has yet to file his counter-affidavit, but does not dispute the fact that the private respondent had withdrawn his complaint before the Lok Adalat. 7. Mrs. Mary L. Khiangte submits that the State is made a party because the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator is kept in the custody of Kulikawn P.S. 8. This court, on considering the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties has also perused the impugned order made by the Lok Adalat on 10.05.2025 which is reproduced below for reference:- “Petitioner : C. Lalrawna Serchhip District Chhiahtlang Ph: 8974964739/7005281131 Opposite Party : Rualkhuma Ralte Hualngohmun, Melriat Ph: 8974214689 Page No.# 4/5 Lok Adalat Case No. : Lok Adalat (Pre) Case No. 114/2025 Reference : Money Suit (Pre - Litigation) Date : 10.05.2025 Copy of Order dated 10.05.2025 C. Lalrawna appeared. Defendant is absent without sufficientreason.The Complainant has withdrawn his complaint as he preferred to approach Civil Court having jurisdiction to claim his relief. Upon the withdrawal of the complainant, this Lok Adalat Case No. 114/2025 is dismissed. However the Officer-In-Charge Kulikawn Police Station is directed to detain the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator, Model No. PC 210 - 10 MO, M/C/ Sl.no. N730953 in the safe and proper custody of the Police Station until any order passed by the Civil Court having jurisdiction. Give copy of this order to all concerned. Conciliators : 1. Pu H.T. Lalmawizuala, Presiding Judge 2. Pi Zothanpari Sailo, Member 3. Pu Zorammawia, Member” 9. A perusal of the above order clearly shows that the complainant had withdrawn his complaint by stating that he prefer to approach the Civil Court having jurisdiction to claim his relief and accordingly, the Lok Adalat case was also dismissed on withdrawal. 10. In view of the above, this court finds that the Lok Adalat had acted beyond its jurisdiction in directing the Officer-in-Charge, Kulikawn Police Station to detain the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator in the safe and proper custody of the Page No.# 5/5 Police Station. This court finds that the Lok Adalat can pass award only when the parties arrived at a compromise or settlement to the dispute as per Section 19(5) of the Legal Services Authorities Act and under Section 9 of the National Legal Services Authority (Lok Adalat) Regulation, 2009. 11. For the above reason, this court finds it fit to interfere with the impugned order dated 10.05.2025 passed by the Lok Adalat in Lok Adalat (Pre) Case No. 114/2025 by setting aside the portion of the order, wherein the Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator is directed to be detain in the custody of the Police Station by the Officer-in-Charge, Kulikawn Police Station. Accordingly, the said Komatsu Hydraulic Excavator is to be returned to the rightful owner. 12. WP(C) No. 57/2025 thus stands allowed and disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant