Mediation During Pendency of Proceedings - Courts and tribunals generally recognize that mediation can be initiated during the pendency of legal proceedings. Several sources highlight that parties involved in ongoing litigation or disputes have the option to seek settlement through mediation while the case is active. For instance, in the case referenced in 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 522, parties actively engaged in mediation from April 2023 to November 2023, and the court noted that no order could be passed on merit during the pendency of mediation proceedings. Similarly, 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56189 reports that parties settled their dispute during mediation attached to the Kerala High Court, even while the appeal was pending.
Legal Restrictions on Passing Orders on Merit During Mediation - The main legal principle is that courts or authorities should refrain from passing final judgments or substantive orders on the merits of the case during ongoing mediation. The 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 522 case emphasizes that no order on merit can be passed during mediation, and attempts to do so could be contrary to legal principles and the doctrine of estoppel. The order passed by the Joint Registrar on 04.05.2023, during active mediation, underscores that the court did not pass any substantive order on the case's merits while mediation was ongoing.
Orders and Proceedings During Mediation - Courts have issued directions to facilitate settlement during mediation, such as extending time limits or allowing parties to explore settlement options, but without prejudicing the case's merits. For example, 2024 0 Supreme(J&K) 416 describes parties executing an agreement during mediation while the appeal was pending, but clarifies that such agreements are not enforceable unless a formal decree is passed by the court.
Implications of Mediation on Court Orders - Courts generally hold that orders or agreements executed during mediation, especially before a formal decree, do not amount to final adjudication. As noted in 2024 0 Supreme(J&K) 416, agreements reached during mediation are not enforceable unless incorporated into a court order. The principle is that during the pendency of proceedings, courts should avoid passing final orders on the case's merits to preserve the integrity of the judicial process.
Legal Framework and Procedure - The legal framework, including provisions like Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, encourages mediation to reduce litigation backlog. However, courts are cautioned to follow proper procedures, ensuring that no substantive order on the merits is passed during the mediation process, as highlighted in
Sheikh Mohammad Danial vs Judge Artha Rin Adalat Chattogram and others - 2024 Supreme(BD)(SC) 8409
and 2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 10642.
Analysis and Conclusion
The overarching principle across these sources is that during the pendency of mediation, courts and authorities should refrain from passing orders on the merits of the case. Mediation is intended as a settlement tool that runs parallel to ongoing litigation, and any substantive order or decree should only be passed post-mediation, once the parties have reached a settlement or the court has fully examined the case on merits. This approach preserves procedural fairness, respects the voluntary nature of mediation, and aligns with legal principles that prohibit passing final orders during active settlement negotiations.
References:- 2025 0 Supreme(Del) 522 – Court's acknowledgment that no order on merit can be passed during mediation.- 2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 56189 – Settlement during mediation while appeal was pending.- 2024 0 Supreme(J&K) 416 – Agreements during mediation are not enforceable unless formalized by court order.-
Sheikh Mohammad Danial vs Judge Artha Rin Adalat Chattogram and others - 2024 Supreme(BD)(SC) 8409
– Procedural violations during settlement proceedings.- 2025 Supreme(Online)(SC) 10642 – Mediation as a tool to reduce litigation, with procedural safeguards to prevent passing orders on merit during pendency.
