The Supreme Court directed the Kalyani family to attempt mediation one last time to settle their long-standing dispute. It appointed retired Justice L. Nageswara Rao as mediator and stayed the Bombay High Court proceedings for two weeks.
Final Mediation Attempt for Kalyani Family
The Supreme Court on Monday asked members of the Kalyani family to make a final attempt to resolve their long-pending dispute through mediation and appointed retired Supreme Court judge Justice L. Nageswara Rao as mediator. The Court granted the parties two weeks to explore the possibility of an amicable settlement. Proceedings in the suit filed by Sugandha Jai Hiremath before the Bombay High Court will remain stayed during this period.
A Bench headed by the Chief Justice observed that it was not inclined to interfere with the Bombay High Court’s order but considered it appropriate to provide the parties with one final opportunity to explore a negotiated settlement. The Court also noted the submissions that one of the respondents was reluctant to participate in another round of mediation in view of previous unsuccessful attempts.
Appeal Follows High Court’s Refusal
The appeal arises from the Bombay High Court’s order dated May 4, which declined to refer the dispute to mediation. The High Court had observed that earlier efforts at settlement had not succeeded and held that mediation under the Mediation Act, 2023, is consensual in nature. It concluded that the facts and circumstances of the case did not justify a court-directed reference to mediation.
Respondents Cite Previous Failures
Senior counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that three previous attempts at resolving the dispute had failed. According to the submissions, the first mediation took place before the Supreme Court in 2018 in connected family proceedings, the second before a district court in 2024, and the third earlier this year. The respondents argued that directing another mediation was unlikely to result in a settlement in light of the parties’ past experience.
The respondents further submitted that the dispute involves several companies, different branches of the family and entities with public shareholding, making the issues more complex than a dispute between individual family members. They contended that the complexity of the shareholding structure had contributed to the failure of previous mediation efforts. (ANI)
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by Asianet Newsable English staff and is published from a syndicated feed.)