Ramachandra Menon, J.
Exhibit P1 complaint filed by the first respondent herein before the second respondent Taluk Legal service Authority was sought to be settled by the appellant/writ petitioner agreeing to satisfy a sum of ₹1,250/- per month as maintenance payable to the complainant, as borne by Exhibit P2 Award passed by the Lok Adalat on 5th June, 2011. It appears that the appellant/writ petitioner had a second thought which made him to approach this Court by filing W.P(C).No.3472 of 2012, seeking to set aside Exhibit P2 Award, contending that it was only due to fraud and misrepresentation, that the petitioner was made to sign the Award. It was also contended that the appellant/writ petitioner was not aware of the contents of Exhibit P2 and hence interference of this Court was sought for.
2. When the matter came up for consideration, the learned Single Judge, after going through Exhibit P2 proceedings, clearly WA.1772/13 2 observed that nothing compelled the writ petitioner to have the issue settled by way of Exhibit P2 Award. Further, Exhibit P1 complaint was in Malayalam and it was after going through the proceedings, that the matter was settled as per Exhibit P3, which is also in Malayalam. Considering the above facts, the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition declining to interfere with the matter. This is under challenge in the Writ Appeal.
3. Heard learned counsel for he appellant as well as learned counsel appearing for the respondents.
4. After hearing both sides and on going through the materials on record, we do not find any justifiable reason for interference by this Court, to unsettle the findings arrived at by the learned Single Judge.
Accordingly, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as devoid of any merit.
MANJULA CHELLUR, CHIEF JUSTICE
vgs3.6.14
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE