At the 2nd National Mediation Conference in Bhubaneswar, Supreme Court Justice BV Nagarathna warned that if government bodies continue filing hopeless cases just to exhaust judicial avenues, it will waste national resources and misallocate valuable judicial time.
At the 2nd National Mediation Conference in Bhubaneswar, Supreme Court Justice BV Nagarathna issued a stern warning to government entities regarding the pursuit of litigation “merely to exhaust judicial avenues” without any real chance of success.
She emphasized that such practices waste national resources, misallocate judicial time, and hinder the acceptance of mediation as a credible method for resolving disputes.
Justice Nagarathna stated,
“If a government body goes on initiating another round of litigation where there exists no likelihood of success, our country’s resources will continue to be improperly used and judicial time mislocated,”
She cautioned that unless state authorities and their successors cease to view mediation settlements with skepticism, partnerships between government and private sectors in mediation will struggle to gain traction.
Justice Nagarathna highlighted the necessity for mediation in India to extend beyond commercial disputes, advocating for specialized mediation in several areas, including:
- Environmental and climate-related conflicts
- Healthcare and medical negligence cases
- Intellectual property disputes
- Corporate governance and startup ecosystem issues
- Juvenile justice matters
She noted,
“Environmental disputes are multifaceted socio-ecological challenges that involve a delicate balance between development and preservation. Mediation, with its flexibility and participatory nature, can provide quick, consensual, and forward-looking solutions,”
To institutionalize this, she called on the Mediation Council of India to establish a panel of accredited “green mediators” trained in environmental law, climate science, public policy, and socio-economic impact assessments.
Drawing inspiration from the US Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental Collaboration and Conflict Resolution (ECCR) model, she proposed that India could professionalize and train cohorts of specialized mediators.
Addressing the power imbalance between patients and large hospitals, Justice Nagarathna suggested involving Patient Advocacy Groups in healthcare mediations to ensure that patient perspectives are adequately represented.
Regarding intellectual property disputes, she pointed out that mediation offers confidentiality and flexibility, leading to innovative solutions like licensing agreements, phased rebranding, and joint marketing strategies that preserve business value and relationships.
For corporate governance and startup conflicts, she recommended including mediation clauses in founders’ agreements and term sheets, asserting that “a founder dispute resolved in weeks rather than years could mean the difference between success and collapse.”
Justice Nagarathna also promoted victim-offender mediation (VOM) under the Juvenile Justice Act, 2015, to genuinely embody the principle of restorative justice.
She explained that VOM creates a safe environment for victims to articulate the impact of harm and for juvenile offenders to acknowledge their responsibility and remorse, achieving outcomes that punitive systems cannot.
The judge underlined that the effectiveness of mediation hinges on public trust in the independence and impartiality of mediators. She observed that most mediations in India are still conducted on an ad hoc basis and called for a formal code of conduct along with a national curriculum for mediator training and certification.
She remarked,
“Every mediator functions as a spoke in the larger wheel of the Indian mediation ecosystem. Their conduct directly impacts public perception of mediation as a serious dispute-resolution mechanism,”
In concluding her address, Justice Nagarathna referred to the Supreme Court’s decisions, reminding attendees that mediation provides a way to avoid the “crippling costs, procedural wrangles, and delays” associated with litigation.
She declared,
“Mediation must be seen not as a secondary option, but as a legitimate and powerful first resort in resolving disputes,”
Justice Surya Kant, also speaking at the conference, described “mediation as the future of justice.” He emphasized that while courtrooms often limit disputes to a binary win-lose outcome, mediation fosters dialogue that can lead to “infinite solutions.”
The event was attended by notable figures, including Odisha Governor Hari Babu Kambhampati, Chief Justice of India Bhushan R. Gavai, Union Minister Dharmendra Pradhan, and Chief Minister Mohan Charan Majhi.
Justice Kant highlighted the notion that some equations yield no solution, some yield only one, but the most remarkable are those with infinite possibilities.
He stated,
“Disputes are also the same. Some close every door. Others allow only a single outcome. But when dialogue begins, conflicts open into many possibilities. Mediation empowers parties to find the solution they can both embrace,”
Chief Justice Gavai remarked that the future of mediation in India cannot rely solely on a single law or conference; its success will depend on sustained practices throughout communities, widespread cultural acceptance, and the establishment of dedicated infrastructure to foster its growth.
Also Read: Supreme Court vs Bihar| Final Voter Roll To Be Released Today!: Key Points Explained
He added,
“It is not the mere existence of a quarrel or disagreement that disturbs our peace, but the refusal to listen, empathize, and make a genuine effort to resolve it,”
Attorney General of India R. Venkataramani also addressed the gathering, advocating for national mediation literacy that law schools should promote.
He expressed the need to transform the dormant mediation law into a powerful entity and to revise the legal framework to reduce court control over mediation.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
