The Delhi High Court ruled that time spent in mediation is excluded from the limitation period for filing written statements, emphasizing mediation’s importance in dispute resolution. This decision allows parties to negotiate without the pressure of procedural deadlines. The Court accepted a late written statement and imposed a cost to support a welfare fund.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has ruled that the time spent by parties in mediation must be excluded when calculating the limitation period for filing a written statement. The ruling came in the case of Bharat Singh Vs. Karan Singh and Others, where the Court set aside an order that had refused to accept a written statement filed after mediation.
The case involved a partition suit, in which the Joint Registrar of the Delhi High Court had rejected a written statement on the grounds that it was filed beyond the 120-day limit prescribed under the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
However, Justice Subramonium Prasad clarified that the mediation process pauses the time limit for filing the written statement. The Court accepted the written statement and directed the defendants to pay a cost of Rs 5,000 to the Armed Forces Battle Casualties Welfare Fund.
The Court strongly emphasized the importance of mediation in resolving disputes amicably.
“If parties are attempting to mediate and settle the dispute and are forced to file written statements, then this will hamper the entire mediation process and would be detrimental to the spirit of mediation,”
the judgment stated.
Justice Prasad further noted that forcing parties to submit written statements during mediation discourages open communication, which is essential for reaching a fair settlement.
“Forcing the parties to file a written statement during mediation will prevent them from freely communicating, which they have not been able to since the dispute started,”
the Court added.
By excluding mediation time from the limitation period, the Delhi High Court has reinforced the importance of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in India’s legal system. The ruling ensures that parties attempting settlement through mediation are not unfairly penalized for taking time to negotiate a resolution.
The Court has listed the matter before the Joint Registrar on March 3, 2025, for further proceedings.
Legal Representation:
- Petitioner’s Advocates: Abhimanyu Mahajan, Abhimanyu Walia, Anubha Goyal, Tanishq Sirohi, and Ishani Pillai.
- Defendants’ Advocates: Utsav Trivedi, Himanshu Sachdeva, Anudatt Dubey, Chand Chopra, Neha Bhupathiraju, Saurav Agarwal, Sunanda Tulsyan, Anshuman Choudhary, and Akhil Sachar.
This judgment sets a crucial precedent in cases where parties opt for mediation before proceeding with court trials, ensuring that settlement efforts are encouraged rather than obstructed by procedural technicalities.
Case Title – Bharat Singh Vs. Karan Singh and Others
Read the Judgement here:
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE