Supreme Court Settles Long-Standing Property Dispute Through Mediation: Kalpana Majumder & Ors. vs. Lakshmi Priya Shaw & Ors. (2018)

Date of the Judgment: July 17, 2018
Citation: (2018) INSC 657
Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J.
Can a long-standing property dispute, entangled with multiple criminal cases, find resolution through mediation? The Supreme Court of India addressed this very question in the case of Smt. Kalpana Majumder & Ors. vs. Smt. Lakshmi Priya Shaw & Ors.. The court, acknowledging the potential for settlement, facilitated a mediation process, leading to a comprehensive resolution of the property dispute and the quashing of related criminal cases. This judgment highlights the effectiveness of mediation in resolving complex legal battles. The judgment was delivered by a two-judge bench comprising Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul.

Case Background

The case involves a protracted property dispute between Smt. Kalpana Majumder and others (the appellants) and Smt. Lakshmi Priya Shaw and others (the respondents). This legal battle has been ongoing since 2002, resulting in multiple litigations and five pending criminal cases between the parties. The core issue revolves around a property transfer and related disputes which have escalated over the years. The appellants sought the transfer of the suit premises in their favor and the cancellation of a Deed of Conveyance.

Timeline:

Course of Proceedings

Initially, the matter came before the Supreme Court, where the judges recognized the possibility of a settlement between the parties. Consequently, the court appointed Ms. Varuna Bhandari, a trained mediator, to facilitate discussions. The mediator dedicated over 35 hours to the mediation process. Ultimately, the parties reached a comprehensive settlement, formalized in a Deed of Settlement dated July 16, 2018. This settlement was then filed with the Supreme Court Registry.

Legal Framework

The judgment primarily focuses on the resolution of disputes through mediation and the subsequent actions to give effect to the settlement. There are no specific legal provisions or statutes discussed in detail in the judgment. The court’s intervention is based on its inherent power to facilitate settlements and ensure justice.

Arguments

The judgment does not detail specific arguments made by either party. Instead, it focuses on the settlement reached through mediation. The primary submission before the Court was the Deed of Settlement, which outlined the agreed-upon terms for resolving all disputes. The parties jointly sought the implementation of the settlement, including the transfer of the suit property, cancellation of the Deed of Conveyance, and the quashing of pending criminal cases.

Issues Framed by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court did not frame specific issues in the traditional sense. Instead, the court focused on the following:
✓ Whether the settlement agreement reached through mediation should be accepted and implemented.
✓ Whether the criminal cases pending between the parties should be quashed as part of the settlement.
✓ Whether the transfer of the suit premises should be directed in favor of the appellants.
✓ Whether the Deed of Conveyance dated 1.03.2005 should be cancelled.

Treatment of the Issue by the Court

Authorities

The judgment does not cite any specific case laws or legal provisions. The court’s decision is primarily based on the settlement reached through mediation and the inherent power of the court to facilitate such settlements. There are no specific authorities that were considered by the Court.

Judgment

The Court did not rely on any specific authorities in this case. The judgment is based on the Deed of Settlement.

What weighed in the mind of the Court?

The Supreme Court’s decision was heavily influenced by the successful mediation and the subsequent settlement agreement between the parties. The Court emphasized the importance of resolving long-standing disputes amicably, especially when parties have reached a mutual understanding. The Court also considered the time and effort put in by the mediator, Ms. Varuna Bhandari, and the cooperation extended by the parties and their counsel. The primary focus was on bringing an end to the protracted litigation and restoring harmony between the parties.

The Court’s reasoning was primarily based on the fact that a settlement had been reached through mediation. The Court noted that the parties had agreed to resolve all their disputes, which included the transfer of property, cancellation of a previous deed, and the quashing of criminal cases. The Court’s decision was aimed at giving effect to this settlement and ensuring that the parties could move forward without further litigation. The court observed:

“In view of the Deed of Settlement dated 16.07.2018, referred to above, we are of the view that for securing the ends of justice, the criminal cases involving them should also be closed.”

The Court also acknowledged the significant effort put in by the mediator, Ms. Varuna Bhandari, and directed that she be adequately remunerated for her services. The court stated:

“Though the learned Mediator Ms. Varuna Bhandari insisted that she does not require any honorarium and the services rendered by her are totally pro bono, having regard to the time and pains taken by the learned Mediator, we are of the view that the learned Mediator should be adequately remunerated.”

The Court emphasized the importance of cooperation by the parties and counsel in facilitating the settlement:

“We record our appreciation for the efforts taken by the learned Mediator, Ms. Varuna Bhandari and for the cooperation extended by the parties and the counsel for putting an end to the almost two decade old litigations between the parties and in particular Mr. Jaideep Gupta, learned senior counsel for facilitating the settlement.”

Key Takeaways

• ✓ Mediation is an effective tool for resolving long-standing disputes, especially those involving multiple litigations and criminal cases.
• ✓ The Supreme Court actively encourages and facilitates settlements through mediation to bring an end to protracted legal battles.
• ✓ When parties reach a settlement, the court will generally uphold the agreement and issue necessary directions to implement it.
• ✓ Courts may quash criminal cases that are part of a larger settlement agreement to ensure complete resolution of disputes.
• ✓ Mediators who contribute significantly to the settlement process are entitled to adequate remuneration for their services.

Directions

The Supreme Court gave the following directions:
✓ The District Sub Registrar, Alipore, West Bengal, was directed to register the transfer of the suit premises in favor of the appellants.
✓ The Registrar was directed to levy only the stamp duty applicable in the year 2002.
✓ The Deed of Conveyance dated 1.03.2005 was declared cancelled.
✓ The parties were directed to abide by the terms and conditions of the Deed of Settlement dated 16.07.2018.

Development of Law

The ratio decidendi of this case is that the Supreme Court will uphold and enforce settlements reached through mediation, especially in long-standing disputes involving multiple litigations. This case reinforces the importance of mediation as a means to resolve complex legal battles and highlights the Court’s willingness to facilitate and support such processes. There is no change in the previous position of law, this case just reinforces the existing position.

Conclusion

In Smt. Kalpana Majumder & Ors. vs. Smt. Lakshmi Priya Shaw & Ors., the Supreme Court successfully resolved a long-standing property dispute through court-facilitated mediation. The Court accepted the Deed of Settlement, quashed related criminal cases, directed the transfer of property, and cancelled a previous deed. The judgment underscores the effectiveness of mediation in resolving complex legal matters and the Court’s commitment to facilitating amicable settlements.