Greaves Cotton Limited vs. State Rep. By The Inspector Of Police
AI Summary
In a significant procedural move, the Supreme Court of India referred a Special Leave Petition (Criminal) to mediation, advising parties to seek an amicable resolution. The Court also issued an interim stay on parallel criminal proceedings in the lower court, signaling a push towards alternative dispute resolution in criminal matters.
Case Identifiers
Petitioner's Counsel
Respondent's Counsel
Advocates on Record
eCourtsIndia AITM
Brief Facts Summary
A Special Leave Petition (Criminal) was filed challenging a final judgment and order of the Madras High Court dated April 13, 2022, which arose from an earlier criminal original petition. During the Supreme Court hearing, a proposal for mediation was put forth by the respondent's counsel and consented to by the petitioner's counsel. Consequently, the Supreme Court referred the matter to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to the High Court, Madras, and stayed the further proceedings in the connected criminal complaint (CC No. 90 of 2016) pending before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ponneri.
Timeline of Events
Criminal Complaint (CC No. 90 of 2016) filed before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ponneri.
Criminal Original Petition (CRLOP No. 27139/2016) filed in the High Court of Judicature at Madras.
Final judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in CRLOP No. 27139/2016.
Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 9500/2022 filed in the Supreme Court of India.
Supreme Court hearing; matter referred to mediation and stay of lower court proceedings granted.
Parties directed to appear before the Coordinator, Mediation and Conciliation Centre, High Court, Madras.
Key Factual Findings
The suggestion for mediation put forth by the learned counsel for Respondent No. 2 is a fair suggestion.
Source: Current Court Finding
The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has no objection to the suggestion of mediation.
Source: Current Court Finding
Primary Legal Issues
Secondary Legal Issues
Petitioner's Arguments
The learned counsel for the petitioner expressed no objection to the suggestion of referring the dispute to mediation.
Respondent's Arguments
Learned counsel representing Respondent No. 2 made a suggestion that the dispute between the parties could be settled through the process of mediation.
Court's Reasoning
The Court considered the suggestion for mediation, noting that it was a 'fair suggestion' and that the learned counsel for the petitioner had 'no objection'. This consensual approach formed the basis for the decision to refer the matter to mediation and to grant a stay on the lower court proceedings.
- Emphasis on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
- Facilitation of Consensual Settlements
Impugned Orders
Specific Directions
- 1.The dispute between the parties is referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to the High Court, Madras.
- 2.Parties are directed to appear before the Coordinator of the Mediation Centre on 2022-11-02.
- 3.The parties shall cooperate in the process of the mediation.
- 4.The mediation report shall be submitted to this Court within six weeks.
- 5.Further proceedings in CC No. 90 of 2016 pending before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ponneri, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing.
Precedential Assessment
Non-Binding (Procedural)
This order is procedural, directing parties to mediation and granting an interim stay. It does not lay down a new principle of law or interpret a statute in a manner that would be binding on other courts for substantive matters, though it reflects the Supreme Court's approach to ADR in criminal cases.
Tips for Legal Practice
Legal Tags
Disclaimer: eCourtsIndia (ECI) is not a lawyer and this analysis is generated by ECI AI, it might make mistakes. This is not a legal advice. Please consult with a qualified legal professional for matters requiring legal expertise.
Original Order Copy
Get a certified copy of this order
Order Text
ITEM NO.19
COURT NO. $15$
SECTION II-C
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 9500/2022
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 13-04-2022 in CRLOP No. 27139/2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras)
VIVEKANANDAN & ORS.
Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE & ORS. Respondent $(s)$
(FOR ADMISSION)
Date: 17-10-2022 This petition was called on for hearing today.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA MURARI HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT
- For Petitioner(s) Mrs. Nalini Chidambaran, Sr. Adv. Mr. S. Nagamuthu, Sr. Adv. Mr. M.p. Parthiban, AOR Mr. A. S. Vairawan, Adv. Mr. R. Sudhakaran, Adv. Mr. G.R. Vikash, Adv. Mr. D. Subrahmanya Bhanu, Adv. Mr. Rohan, Adv. Mr. Harihara Sudhan, Adv.
- Mr. Siddharth Dave, Sr. Adv. For Respondent(s) Ms. Archana Sahadeva, AOR Mr. Siddharth Raj Choudhary, Adv. Mr. Madhav Chitale, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R
After the matter was heard at some length, a fair Aggestion has been given by learned counsel representing respondent no. 2 that the dispute between the parties can be settled through the process of mediation.
Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has no objection to the said suggestion.
Considering the fact, let the dispute be referred to the Mediation and Conciliation Centre attached to the High Court, Madras. Parties to appear before the Coordinator on 02.11.2022. The parties shall cooperate in the process of the mediation and the report be submitted to this Court within six weeks.
Till the next date of hearing, further proceedings in CC No. 90 of 2016 pending before the Judicial Magistrate No. 1, Ponneri, shall remain stayed.
(SONIA GULATI) (BEENA JOLLY) SENIOR PERSONAL ASSISTANT COURT MASTER (NSH)