The main legal point established in the judgment is that a mediation settlement can be enforced by the court, and the court has the power to attach properties to recover the amount agreed to be paid.

JUDGMENT

Yogesh Khanna, J. - This petition is filed for impugning the order dated 20.11.2021 passed by learned MM (NI Act)-02 (Central), Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi thereby dismissing an application filed by the petitioner under Section 431 Cr.P.C. read with Section 421 Cr.P.C. seeking enforcement of mediation settlement dated 19.02.2019.

2. The parties executed a settlement agreement on 19.02.2019 before the mediation centre in order to settle all their pending disputes in various fora and pursuant thereto specific statements of respondent no.1 and her husband were recorded by learned MM in terms of judgment passed in Dayawati vs. Yogesh Kumar Gosain (2017) 243 DLT 117. Late Shri A.A. Murugaiah, husband of respondent no.1 also gave personal guarantee for compliance/ payment as per the settlement agreement dated 19.02.2019. However, after paying few installments the respondent failed to fulfill their obligation and resultantly committed its breach. Subsequently, to enforce the abovementioned settlement agreement, the petitioner filed an application on 23.08.2021 under Section 431 Cr.P.C. read with Section 421 Cr.P.C. praying interalia for attachment of shares and properties of respondents i.e., ABC Hospital, Assured Best Care Hospital Private Limited, No.1, Annamalia Nagar Main Road. Near Karur Byepass Road, Trichy, in light of the guidelines given in Dayawati (supra). The said application dated 23.08.2021 was dismissed by the learned MM vide impugned order dated 20.11.2021.

3. It is submitted the learned MM erred in the impugned order a) by limiting her jurisdiction to only the proceedings pending before her prior to the execution of settlement dated 19.02.2019; and b)the learned MM erred in saying the application is premature.

4. I have perused the mediation agreement dated 19.02.2019 annexed as annexure A of this paper book. It refers to three set of cases referred to in Mediation being a) 31 cases under Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act pertaining to 31 cheques for a total amount of Rs.1,34,07,966/- each delivered by the respondent to the petitioner for discharge of commercial liability; b) 18 other similar complaints pending between the parties but in a different court and c) a decree dated 16.11.2016 passed by the High Court of Delhi in case bearing CS(OS) No.3402/2015 passed in favour of the complainant and transferred to the Madras High Court for its execution.

5. The parties settled in terms of clause Nos.1 to 10 of the mediation agreement and the respondent were to pay for 31 complaints an amount of Rs.1,34,07,966/- latest by 31.07.2019 with 10% interest per annum till 31.07.2019; for 18 criminal complaints Rs.53,03,127/- with 10% interest till 31.07.2019 and Rs.3.00 crores in six half early installments of Rs.50.00 lacs each from 30.08.2019 to 28.08.2022. In case of any delay the rate of interest was to be increased to 14% on the delayed period but in any case the entire payments were to be made prior to 28.02.2022. As per clause 9 of the agreement Shri A.A. Murugaiah took personal liability for compliance and payment as agreed in the settlement. The respondent no.1 herein was also present in mediation proceedings; signed the mediation agreement and even gave a statement before the Court on 19.02.2019 which read as under:

'I am one of the accused in the present matter. I state that the matter has been settled between the parties before Mediation Centre today i.e. 19.02.2019.The mediation settlement is now Ex.P1 bearing my signature at point B on all three pages. I state that said settlement has been entered into by me of my own free will after fully understanding the contents and implications thereof. I undertake to abide by the said settlement. I understand that in case of any breach/default. I shall be liable to be proceeded with further under Section 431 r/w Section 421 Cr.P.C. in terms of Judgment of Hon'ble Delhi High Court titled as Dayawati Vs. Yogesh Kumar Gosain, Crl Reference No. 1/2016. I am making this state