Delhi High Court Encourages Mediation Over Contempt Proceedings in Kohli Family Property Dispute under Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 - 2026-02-17

From Confrontation to Collaboration: Delhi High Court Appoints Mediator in Kohli Family Dispute

In a move prioritizing resolution over punishment, the High Court of Delhi has opted to appoint a mediator to navigate the ongoing impasse between family members Praveen Kohli and Sunil Kohli. The court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jasmeet Singh, held that the ongoing contempt proceedings were less a matter of willful defiance and more a consequence of deep-seated trust issues between the parties.

The Path to Contempt

The matter stems from an order dated October 19, 2020, passed in Praveen Kohli vs. Sunil Kohli (OMP(I)(COMM) 984/2020). Despite the existence of this court mandate, the parties returned to the High Court with contempt petitions (CONT.CAS(C) 681/2021 and 642/2022) alleging that the other side had failed to fully comply with the directives. These petitions were filed under Sections 11 and 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Article 215 of the Constitution of India.

Arguments: A Case of Trust, Not Defiance

During the proceedings, counsels for both Mr. Praveen Kohli and Mr. Sunil Kohli acknowledged that while sections of the 2020 order had been successfully complied with, significant portions remained outstanding.

The crux of the argument was not centered on a lack of intent, but rather a functional inability to execute the court’s directives due to an overwhelming "trust deficit" between the two sides. Both parties eventually signaled their mutual consent for the court to intervene by appointing an external mediator to facilitate the final execution of the mandates.

Key Observations

Justice Jasmeet Singh’s assessment of the case emphasized the court’s role as an facilitator of justice rather than merely a punitive authority:

• "I am of the view that none of the parties are prima-facie guilty of intentional and malafide violation of the order dated 19.10.2020 and the contempt petitions have only been filed for the enforcement of the Order dated 19.10.2020."
• "The parties have not been able to effectively execute the Order dated 19.10.2020 due to trust deficit issues."
• "The mediator is expected to conclude the exercise expeditiously and in any case not later than 6 months from today."

The Court’s Directive: Mediation as a Way Forward

Recognizing that strict contempt proceedings might only widen the rift between the parties, the Court appointed Ms. Veena Ralli (Advocate) as the mediator. The parties are directed to appear before her on March 2, 2026.

To bridge the path to full compliance, the court established clear conditions: 1. Administrative Cooperation: The mediator’s fees of Rs. 75,000 per month will be shared equally by the parties. 2. Legal Cleanup: Mr. Sunil Kohli is required to file a petition to quash FIR No. 144/2020 at Police Station Jagat Puri, with the mandatory cooperation of Mr. Praveen Kohli.

The contempt petitions have been disposed of for now, with the High Court granting the parties the liberty to revive the petitions if the mediation fails to yield a final settlement. By choosing this route, the High Court has effectively transformed a legal standoff into a structured attempt at resolution, underscoring that where trust is the primary obstacle, legal coercion must sometimes yield to facilitated dialogue.