Settlement Agreement Under Section 73

The 2004 Mediation and Conciliation Rules divert their existence and legal power from the CPC and cannot confer such substantive rights that the Enabling Act does not impose. The intention of the power of assimilation under Rule 25 is to give sanctity to a mediation agreement entered into in the context of mediation in accordance with the law. The conciliator shall establish the terms of the settlement agreement on the basis of his findings during the conciliation proceedings, as well as on the basis of the written statements and supporting documents of the parties. These will then be forwarded to the parties for comment, if any, and, if necessary, a restated comparative agreement will be made on the basis of these notices.1 Neither Section 89 nor Rule 1-A of Regulation 10 CPC will replace or amend the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 or the Legal Services Authorities Act. 1987. On the contrary, it is specified that two of the ADR procedures, i.e. arbitration and conciliation, are governed by the Legal Services Act and the other two ADR procedures, i.e. the Lok Adalat transaction and mediation. With regard to the last of the ADR proceedings, i.e. the court settlement, Section 89 clarifies that it is not governed by an order and that the Court will follow the procedure that may be imposed (by appropriate rules).

Similarly, in Rawlins v. Rawlins 258 S.E.2d 187 (Ga. Ct. App. 1979), the Ontario Superior Court has begged the courts to be extremely vigilant and to remove comparative agreements only in exceptional circumstances, for example. B where there is clear evidence of coercion, fraud, bad faith or false instructions. Therefore, the execution of such a transaction should be carried out in accordance with Section 36 of Chapter VIII of the AC Act. While under article 30, mediation and conciliation agreements may be registered in the form of an arbitral award on agreed terms and thus assimilated, the application of settlement agreements concluded in the context of private mediation is recognized by law under Part III of the Act. “43. We can summarise the procedure to be applied by a court under Article 89 of the Code as follows: that intention and objective are achieved when the main proceedings are set aside either by judgment of law in the appeal for settlement or by the procedure, only if substantive law so requires. This objective is also achieved by an order which adopts and orders the procedure for comparison in proceedings in which substantive law does not provide for the adoption of a decree under the AC Law. In Mysore Cements Ltd.

v. Svedala Barmac Ltd, AIR 2003 SC 3493, the issue before the Court was as follows: “A statement of consolation made on the same day by a settlement concluded during the conciliation, signed by both parties and certified by the conciliators, shall be enforceable in the same manner as an arbitral award under article 74, in connection with sections 30 and 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996?” `35. Conciliation is a non-judicial ADR procedure, which is also governed by the provisions of law AC. A valid reference to mediation can only exist if both parties to the dispute agree to conduct negotiations with the assistance of a third party or a third party either by agreement or by the invitation and acceptance procedure provided for in Section 62 of the AC Act, followed by the appointment of conciliators in accordance with Section 64 of the AC Act. . . .