Research › Search › Judgment

Chhattisgarh High Court · body

2002 DIGILAW 58 (CHH)

R. K. Agrawal v. M. L. Shahni

2002-08-02

FAKHRUDDIN

body2002
ORDER Fakhruddin, J. 1. Heard. 2. Counsel for the parties submit that the matter is such, which can be reconciled under Section 89 of Code of Civil Procedure. They pray that the case may be taken after sometime. 3. The case was accordingly taken up after sometime. 4. Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure is relevant and is quoted below:-- "89. Settlement of disputes outside the Court.-- (1) Where it appears to the Court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the Court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations and after receiving the observations of the parties, the Court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for- (a) arbitration; (b) conciliation; (c) judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat; or mediation. (2) Where a dispute has been referred- (a) for arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply as if the proceedings for arbitration or conciliation were referred for settlement under the provisions of that Act; ` (b) to Lok Adalat, the Court shall refer the same to the Lok Adalat in accordance with the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply in respect of the dispute so referred to the Lok Adalat; (c) for judicial settlement, the Court shall refer the same to a suitable institution or person and such institution or person shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a Lok Adalat under the provisions of that Act; (d) for mediation, the Court shall effect a compromise between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed. 5. Non-applicant Shri M.L. Shahni submits that so far as he is concerned, he has the highest regard for the applicant. He never intended to either insult or misbehave with the applicant. For every word he has written, he feels sorry. 6. 5. Non-applicant Shri M.L. Shahni submits that so far as he is concerned, he has the highest regard for the applicant. He never intended to either insult or misbehave with the applicant. For every word he has written, he feels sorry. 6. The applicant present in Court appreciated the gesture shown by the non-applicant and submitted that in view of the submissions made by non-applicant and the feelings expressed, he does not want to prosecute. 7. The parties have no grudge with each other. They have settled their dispute amicably. 8. Before parting, this Court appreciates the gesture shown by rival parties and also the reconciliation.