Kiran Raj

The Supreme Court of India Division Bench of Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Atul S. Chandurkar concluded a four-decade-old property dispute in Hamirpur, Himachal Pradesh, by approving a mediated settlement achieved under the supervision of Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal. Commending the mediator’s role, the Court remarked that lawyers will inevitably evolve into mediators who adopt a problem-solving approach rather than an adversarial stance. The Bench accepted the agreement reached through mediation, ordering that the civil appeal be disposed of and a decree prepared in accordance with the settlement, thereby formally ending a protracted family litigation.

The matter originated from a prolonged dispute between related parties over ownership and possession of ancestral agricultural and residential properties situated in village Jharlog Uparla, Tehsil Moranj, District Hamirpur. The conflict persisted for almost forty years, involving contentions over the rightful division of land, house structures, and commercial areas among family members. Notice in the present civil appeal was issued in November 2011. Upon listing before the Court in October 2024, Senior Advocate Gaurav Agrawal was appointed as mediator to facilitate amicable resolution.

Also Read: Supreme Court: Right To Seek Arbitration Not Lost Despite Inoperable Clause Under Statutory Amendment; Dispute Referred To Delhi International Arbitration Centre

The mediator undertook personal visits to Hamirpur, interacted with both parties, and examined the property in question. The appellant’s counsel expressed appreciation for the mediator’s role in achieving consensus through direct engagement, while the respondent’s counsel confirmed acceptance of the mediator’s proposals. The subject properties included agricultural land, a residential house, cow-shed, and adjoining shops. The settlement terms, as recorded, were mutually agreed and submitted to the Supreme Court for disposal of the appeal in accordance with the mediated agreement.

The Bench observed that “the essence of dispute resolution lies in selfless endeavour which is at the core of harmonious living.” It recorded that the mediator “shed the argumentative skills and adversarial demeanor of a lawyer and embarked on a journey to Hamirpur to mediate the dispute between the parties.”

Referring to the evolving role of lawyers, the Court observed, “If lawyers are to double-up and evolve as mediators, a development which we consider is inevitable, they must cultivate a distinct set of skills and adopt a new attitude towards dispute resolution, one that diverges from adversarial litigation. The acquisition of these skills and mind set begins with revisiting certain traditional techniques and practices developed for argumentation.”

It further recorded that “mediators speak by listening,” highlighting that patience and understanding form the foundation of effective conciliation. The Bench stated that “the model of mediation that we envision for our country, which may be termed swadeshi mediation, involves transcending the binary often embedded in western approaches, where professionalism is separated from individual character.”

Also Read: Delhi High Court restrains YouTuber from posting disparaging content alleging ‘BROCODE’ beverage is unsafe and infringing trademark

The judgment acknowledged the “power of trust, simplicity and efficacy of the technique of persuasion through mediation,” reflecting the Court’s approval of collaborative dispute resolution over prolonged adversarial proceedings.

The Court directed that the agricultural land described in Khata No. 41, Khatoni Nos. 126 to 137, Khasra No. 150, measuring 12 Kanals 13 Marlas in village Jharlog Uparla, be measured by the Patwari in the presence of both parties. Out of the demarcated area, the respondent may select 7 Kanals 10 Marlas, which shall be handed over to him by the appellant in the Patwari’s presence. The residential house and cow-shed were to remain with the appellant and her children, as were the shops and the land beneath and behind them. The Registry was directed to draw a decree accordingly.

Advocates Representing the Parties

For the Appellant(s): Mr. Akhil Sachar, Adv.; Ms. Babita Rawat, Adv.; M/s. Karanjawala & Co., AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. G. Arudhra Rao, Adv.; Mr. Merusagar Samantaray, AOR

Case Title: Raksha Devi v. Parkash Chand
Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 1216
Case Number: Civil Appeal No. 7435 of 2012
Bench: Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Justice Atul S. Chandurkar