Mediation agreements require consent from all parties involved, including non-parties, to be enforceable and the court can direct compliance with agreed terms.

Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Section 89 - Settlement Agreement - Disputes between parties settled via Mediation - Terms of settlement included non-parties necessitating their inclusion for consent - Appeal disposed of with directions for the release of amounts as agreed upon - Impugned decree modified per settlement. (Paras 1-5)

(B) Mediation and Conciliation - Court role in facilitating settlement and enforcing terms agreed upon by parties. (Paras 1 and 4)

Facts of the case:
The disputes in this appeal were settled via a Settlement Agreement dated 11th March, 2022, with terms involving non-parties requiring their consent. The court noted the absence of objections from the party representing the non-party.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the release of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- and Rs. 1,03,54,000/- along with the accrued interest, as per the terms of the settlement, and modified the impugned decree accordingly.

Issues: Whether non-parties are required to provide consent for the terms of the settlement to be effective.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of including non-parties for consent to the settlement terms, highlighting the role of mediation in dispute resolution.

Result: Appeals disposed of as per the settlement agreement.

Table of Content
1. settlement agreement executed. (Para 1)
2. inclusion of third party in settlement. (Para 2)
3. appeal disposed of per settlement. (Para 3)
4. release of funds per settlement. (Para 4)
5. modification of decree as per settlement. (Para 5)
6. final disposal of appeals confirmed. (Para 6)

ORDER (ORAL)

CM APPL. 17112/2022

1. The disputes between the parties in this appeal stand settled by way of Settlement Agreement dated 11th March, 2022, executed with the intervention of the Delhi High Court Mediation and Conciliation Centre. A copy of the settlement agreement has been placed on record.

2. As the terms of the settlement involve Mrs. Anshul Arora, wife of Mr. Ankur Arora, (through her Power of Attorney holder, Mr. Ankur Arora), who is not a party to this appeal, this application also seeks that she be made a party so that she can provide her consent to the terms of settlement. Today, Ms. Farheen Fatima appears on behalf of Mr. Ankur Arora and submits that she has no objection to the terms of the settlement executed between the appellant and the respondent.

3. As such, nothing survives for adjudication in the present appeal. The appeal stands disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement dated 11th March, 2022, executed between the parties.

4. In accordance with the terms of settlement, the learned trial Court is directed to release, the amount of Rs. 1,50,00,000/- deposited along with interest accrued thereon, in favour of Respondents 1 to 4 and the Registrar General of this Court is directed to release, Rs. 1,03,54,000/-, deposited with this Court along with interest accrued thereon to the appellant.

5. The impugned decree dated 24th November, 2006 stands modified in terms of the settlement executed between the parties.

6. Both the appeals stand disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document