Proceedings Before Mediator Confidential, Parties Can't Be Compelled To Abide By Offers Made During Negotiations: Jammu & Kashmir High Court

A bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar made these observations while hearing petitions under Article 227 of Constitution through the medium of which the petitioner/plaintiff had challenged an order passed by Sub Judge Chadoora whereby application of the petitioner for amendment of the plaint had been partly declined.

The petitioner/plaintiff submitted that he had sought amendment of his plaint before the civil court below on two counts. One, that he should be permitted to incorporate subsequent event of raising construction of plinth to the height of 6 feet during the pendency of the suit and the second, that during the pendency of the suit a compromise had been arrived at between the parties but the same could not be placed before the Court as the defendants resiled from the same, it was submitted.

The petitioner submitted that while the first part of the amendment had been allowed by the trial Court,  the 2nd part of the amendment was declined.

The petitioner/plaintiff contended that whole of the amendment sought by the petitioner deserved to be allowed and that the trial Court was not justified in disallowing amendment to the extent of incorporation of facts relating to compromise arrived at between the parties.

Dealing with the matter in, Justice Dhar noted that during the pendency of the suit the compromise was arrived at between the plaintiff and the defendants, but somehow the defendants resiled from it and it was not placed before the Court.

Pointing out to the fact that the compromise was not signed by the defendants the bench said that even if the compromise existed, the same was only a piece of paper and does not have any bearing upon the outcome of the suit.

Observing that the said compromise may have been arrived at between the parties during the mediation proceedings but the same could not materialize, the court underscored that whatever has transpired between the parties before the Mediator cannot be subject matter of adjudication before the Court.

Taking recourse to Rule 20 of J&K Mediation and Conciliation Rules 2019 the bench explained that whatever has transpired between the parties during the mediation proceedings which includes the drafts given by the parties has to remain confidential and the same cannot be used by the parties in court proceedings against each other.

"Therefore, the alleged draft compromise would not help the trial Court in determining the real controversy between the parties. The learned trial Court has rightly declined the amendment application to this aspect. Thus, there is no illegality, much less gross illegality committed by the trial Court while passing impugned order", the bench maintained.

In view of the said legal position the petition challenging order passed by the trial Court was dismissed and the said order was upheld.

Case Title: Mohammad Abdullah Bhat Vs Nazir Ahmad Bhat & Ors.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (JKL) 78

Counsel For Petitioner: Mr. M.I.Qadiri, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Avees Geelani, Advocate.

Counsel For Respondent: Mr. S.N.Ratanpuri, Advocate

Click Here To Read/Download The Judgement