ABSTRACT:
This study delves into the functioning of family courts in Chennai, with a particular focus on the integration of Lok Adalat as an alternative dispute resolution mechanism. The introduction establishes the importance of substantive and procedural laws in ensuring effective justice delivery and highlights the challenges faced by India’s legal system, including lengthy litigation processes and case backlogs. The research problem centers on investigating the efficacy of Lok Adalat in expediting family dispute resolutions compared to traditional court proceedings. A review of literature provides insights from various scholarly works on legal services, arbitration, and alternative dispute resolution. The aim and objectives of the study include evaluating the operational efficiency of family courts, assessing the role of Lok Adalat, analyzing litigant satisfaction levels, and identifying challenges in accessing justice. The research methodology involves empirical research with data collected through questionnaires, supplemented by secondary sources such as books and journals. The study’s scope covers the integration of Lok Adalat in Chennai’s family courts, while limitations include potential generalizability constraints and subjectivity in perceptions. Overall, the study aims to contribute to understanding and improving the efficiency of family dispute resolution in Chennai’s legal system.
KEYWORDS:
Family courts, Lok Adalat, alternative dispute resolution, litigation, efficiency, Chennai.
INTRODUCTION:
In every civilised society there are two differences of laws that govern the lives of the citizens substantive law and procedural law. Despite the fact that substantive laws are comparatively more important, the efficacy of substantive laws is contingent upon the qualitative deliverance of procedural laws. The latter needs to be efficient, simple, expeditious and inexpensive, lest the substantive provisions fail in fulfillment of their purpose and object. For proper dispensation of justice the procedural and substantive law have to work hand in hand.Litigation in India is notoriously lengthy and costly, with civil courts often burdened by delays and an expected backlog of 40 million cases. These persistent delays have significantly undermined public confidence in the “rule of law” (Ghosh, n.d.). Consequently, arbitration has gained considerable traction in India as a preferre
d method for resolving disputes outside the traditional judicial system. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, was introduced to establish a fair, efficient, and specialized arbitral process. It mandates that arbitral tribunals justify their awards, operate within their jurisdiction, minimise court intervention, and ensure that final arbitral awards are enforced like court decrees (Merkin and Flannery, 2014). The Act’s primary goal is to expedite dispute resolution, but this aim can be thwarted if preliminary disagreements delay arbitration proceedings in the courts. To prevent such delays, arbitration cases should be resolved mainly based on relevant documents and affidavits, though exceptional cases may warrant oral evidence. In all instances, judicial authorities must handle these matters expeditiously, distinct from standard civil suits (“American Depository (ADR)”, 1999).
Lok Adalat or the People‘s Cb. ourts, decide the dispute with utmost expedition to make a compromise or settlement on the idea of principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles. When the Lok Adalat is not ready to reach a compromise or settlement, the record of the case is returned to the Court, which initially referred the case to the Lok Adalats.Adalat is a system of alternative dispute resolution which finds its origin in India and got established as a system with the changing times. India has the history of resolving disputes through the intervention, conciliation, mediation and counselling by village elders and gentries popularly referred to as the panch or panchparmeshwar. this technique though effective was susceptible to various maladies. Therefore renovating and augmenting it with a guided system was an excellent achievement within the legal history of India.
The evolution of system traced back in the vedic times .Some times minor variations can be seen in people’s court in some villages who doesn’t have little or no access to the formal court reference to found in The relevance and functioning of this system has been discussed in the texts of Yajnavalkya, Narad, Gautama, Kautilya Brihaspati, Manu and Bhrigu. Generally, these People’s Court was of three kinds namely Puga, Sreni and Kulla.During Muslim period in India, these people’s court with different names as panchayats continuously functioned with minor variations. Throughout the Muslim rule there was no direct or systematic state control of the administration of justice in the villages where most of India lived.
RESEARCH PROBLEM:
The research problem investigates the inefficiencies and delays in family courts in Chennai, compounded by a significant case backlog. It examines the role and impact of Lok Adalat in expediting family dispute resolutions compared to traditional court processes. The study seeks to determine how effectively Lok Adalat integrates with family courts, assesses litigant satisfaction, and identifies challenges to propose improvements for a more efficient judicial system.