Delhi HC to Decide on Excluding Mediation Time from Filing Deadlines

Delhi HC to Examine Mediation Time Exclusion in Filing Deadlines

The Delhi High Court has escalated to a larger bench the significant legal question of whether the duration spent in mediation should be excluded from the statutory deadlines for submitting written statements and replications in civil litigation. Justice Subramonium Prasad noted that divergent judicial opinions by coordinate and division benches have led to ambiguity on this matter. Consequently, Justice Prasad has requested Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya to form a bench, consisting of two or three judges, to deliberate on this issue.

The pivotal question posed is: Should the time spent in mediation be excluded when calculating the limitation period for filing written statements or replications as outlined in Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018?

Justice Prasad emphasized the growing importance of mediation in contemporary legal processes, especially as India strives towards a “Vivad Mukt Bharat” (dispute-free India). He remarked, “In the present times, particularly when India is endeavouring towards a ‘Vivad Mukt Bharat’, considerable emphasis is being placed on mediation. Compelling a party to file a written statement, thereby shifting the focus towards adversarial litigation, would mean swimming against the tide favouring mediation.”

This decision by the Court follows an appeal filed by a litigant against a Joint Registrar’s order, which condoned the delay by defendants in filing their written statement. The Joint Registrar had excluded nearly four months that were spent in mediation proceedings. The parties involved were referred to mediation in September 2023, but their settlement efforts concluded unsuccessfully by January 2024, after which the defendants submitted their written statement.

In a detailed 22-page judgment, Justice Prasad highlighted that the precedents of the Delhi High Court are split on whether the time allocated for mediation can be considered as an exception to the mandatory timeline outlined in Chapter VII of the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018. He stressed the necessity of a definitive ruling to prevent inconsistent decisions by joint registrars. Therefore, he has escalated the matter to a larger bench for a conclusive resolution.