TEAM CODE : J

BA LLB

ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

KERALA LAW ACADEMY LAW
COLLEGE,
TRIVANDRUM.

MEMORANDUM FOR
CONCILIATION

PARTIES INVOLVED:

CONCILIATOR: Adv. Amritha Sekhar

PARTIES: 1. Mr Ali Ahmed (Petitioner)
2. Christy John (Respondent)

1
LIST OF CONTENTS

 GENERAL INTRODUCTION ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION (ADR)

 THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE

RESOLUTION

 FACTS OF THE CASE

 FACTS IN ISSUE

 SCRIPT OF THE ROLE PLAY

 INTRODUCTORY SESSION

 PRESENTING SESSION

 CONSENSUS SESSION

 SETTLEMENT/CONCLSUION SESSION

 DECISIONS

 STUDENT DETAILS

2
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Today’s world has become globalised and commercial with the advent of technology. People can now
contact each other and settle business deals and disputes when they are sitting at the opposite ends of
the world. Most people no longer have the time to go and file papers at the courts and then wait long
periods for a hearing. We are rapidly approaching a stage where litigation is being replaced with
alternative dispute resolution (ADR), due to the inefficiencies and drawbacks of litigation. India
hasn’t quite reached a stage where litigation has been completely displaced by ADR methods, but the
legal system is beginning to see the benefits of ADR. This article shall be helpful to give you an
overview of the ADR methods and how it is beneficial.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) refers to a range of dispute settlement methods which help the
parties in the dispute to come to a settlement without going to court, or without litigating on the said
matter. These methods usually involve a third party, who helps them in settling the disputes. In many
cases, ADR methods are used alongside the litigation process as well through court authorisation.As
stated in the 222nd Report of the Law Commission of India, the Constitution has guaranteed access to
justice for all, primarily through Article 39A, which states that everyone must have an equal
opportunity of getting justice and this must not be denied to any citizen by reason of economic or
other sort of disabilities.

The report further states that ‘access to justice’ for the common masses in India means access to the
courts of law. But even that has been hindered, due to factors like poverty, illiteracy, ignorance, social
and political backwardness etc. In a developing country like India, many people still live in poverty.
When their rights get violated, they often do not have the money to fight long battles in the Court.
They do not have the money to afford a lawyer. They do not know the legal system and procedures.
Therefore, they often think that the court system is an inconvenience. These kinds of inefficiencies
are shared reasons among many countries, which is why ADR is being explored. The courts also have
too many pending cases and these cases keep going on for many years which is a tremendous burden
to the courts.

3
These reasons prompted the Indian Government to enact Section 89 of the Code of Civil
Procedure, 1908 and replace the earlier Arbitration Act,1940 with The Arbitration and Conciliation
Act 1996, in accordance with the mandates of the United Nations Commission on International Trade
Law (UNCITRAL).

4
 Pros of ADR

 It is less expensive.

 It is less time consuming.

 It is free from the technicalities that are present in the court system.

 The parties are free to differ in their opinion and can discuss their opinions with each other, without any
fear of disclosure of this fact before the courts.

 There is no feeling of enmity between the parties as there is no winning and losing side. They also get
their grievances redressed and their relationship remains as it was before, therefore, they can conduct
future business deals with each other.

 ADR is more suitable for multi-party disputes, as all the parties can put forward their opinions at the
same place and in one go, rather than going to court again and again. Also, it provides for a wider
perspective of the dispute.

 The parties often have the choice of the ADR method to be used. They sometimes also have the choice
to select the individuals or bodies who will settle the dispute.

 The process is also very flexible, according to what suits the parties.

 The parties also have the option of being confidential. The ADR system also enables the parties to put
focus on practical solutions.

 A wider range of issues are considered and shared future interests of the parties are protected.

 ADR system also allows for risk management.

Cons of ADR

 ADR is not helpful where a dispute is to be decided on the basis of a precedent.

 When there is a need for court and interim orders, ADR would not be useful.
 ADR is less suitable when there is a need for enforcement.
 When there is a need for live and expert evidence and analysis in a case, then ADR would not be
useful.

 When there is an imbalance of power, between the parties in the dispute, then ADR would not work.
 If the case is of a complex nature, then the adjudicating body must look into minor details and may
need expert advice and suggestions. Here, ADR would probably not work.

5
 Types of ADR methods

 Arbitration

Arbitration in India is governed by The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. It is a form of dispute
resolution where one or more parties are appointed to adjudicate the dispute. They act as third parties.
This third party should be neutral and this party is referred to as an ’arbitrator’ while the decision of
the arbitrator, which is essentially a determination of merits in the case, is known as ‘arbitration
award’.

The arbitration process is informal and this process allows the dispute to be resolved amicably and
efficiently as it takes less time and involves lesser costs for the parties. Therefore, parties frequently
choose to arbitrate when disputes arise, especially in the business world. Big corporations would
rather settle disputes quickly, rather than fighting long cases in the courts.

Before the arbitration process begins, an arbitration agreement is required to be formed. This
agreement lays down the terms and conditions on which the arbitration process is carried out. It is
determined through this agreement as to how the process will be made cheaper, efficient and how the
rules of evidence would be applied etc. This agreement should be valid as per The Indian Contract
Act 1972 and the parties must have the capacity to contract under Sections 11 and 12 of the same Act.

Arbitral decisions are final and binding on the parties, who have limited scope of objecting to the
decisions. Non-binding arbitrations also exist wherein the party can request a trial if it is not satisfied
with the arbitrator’s decision.

 Ad Hoc Arbitration

Under ad hoc arbitration, the parties involved in the dispute determine the conduct of the arbitration
proceedings themselves, without going to an arbitral institution. In case if the parties are not able to
settle on one arbitrator, or one of the parties is reluctant to appoint that particular arbitrator, then
Section 11 of The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 will be invoked by the other party. Under
Section 11 of the Act, the arbitrator for that dispute will be appointed by either the Chief Justice of
the Supreme Court or his designate or the Chief Justice of the High Court or his designate.

6
 If it is a domestic arbitration, then the Chief Justice of the High Court or his designate will
appoint the arbitrator.

 If it is international commercial arbitration, then the Chief Justice of India or his designate will
appoint the arbitrator. In ad hoc arbitration, the fee of the arbitrator is decided mutually by the parties
and the arbitrator.

 Institutional Arbitration

In this kind of arbitration, the parties decide in the agreement itself, that an arbitration institution will
administer the arbitration. The Indian institutions are International Centre for Alternative Dispute
Resolution and the Indian Council of Arbitration. These institutions formulate the rules for arbitration
owing to their experience in observing arbitral procedures and situations, therefore they are prepared
for all possible situations that may arise in future arbitration cases.

 Mediation

In mediation, a third neutral party aims to assist two or more disputants in reaching a settlement. This
third party is referred to as the mediator. The mediator needs to properly communicate with both the
parties and use proper negotiation techniques, in order to make one party fully aware of the other
party’s perspective, through empathy and dialogue. This process is controlled by the parties.

One of the characteristics of this type of dispute resolution is that the mediator is not allowed to give
an outcome of the dispute. The solution is given mutually, and the agreements are generally non
binding. Parties are in significant control of the mediation process and it is strictly confidential. The
parties can even go for litigation if they are not satisfied with the mediation process.

It must be observed that the main aim of the mediation process is to build relationships, and not to
make a decision. It is more of an amicable resolution of differences with potential form future
business between the parties.

7
 Negotiation

Negotiation is also a form of dispute resolution, but there is no third party to adjudicate the matter,
therefore the parties work together to find a mutually acceptable solution or a compromise. The
parties may choose to be represented by their attorneys during their negotiations. Negotiation is not
statutorily recognized in India. There are no set rules for conducting a negotiation.

 Essentials of negotiation-

 It is a process of communication which helps to resolve conflicts.

 It can be entered into voluntarily and its outcome is non-binding.

 The parties are benefitted here as they have control over the outcome and procedure and the
process is carried out keeping their interests in mind.

 Conciliation

In conciliation, the third party, who is called the conciliator, talks to the parties involved separately so
that the parties can arrive at a mutually acceptable solution through facilitating talks between the
parties. Conciliation is also governed in India under The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Under Section 61, conciliation is provided for disputes arising out of legal relationships, whether they
are contractual or not.

Difference between mediation and conciliation

In mediation, the mediator plays a more active role in the the process by proposing compromise
solutions after hearing all parties while in the case of conciliation, the conciliator has to bring the
parties into such a state of mind as to facilitate the parties to come to an acceptable compromise.

Lok- Adalats

In a country like India where there are many illiterate people, the concept of Lok Adalats is a necessity.
This was first introduced in 1982 in Gujarat. This concept mainly focused on reducing the burden of
pending cases on the Courts and has incorporated the concept keeping in mind various factors like
social justice. Lok Adalats are governed under The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987.
8
Sections 19, 20, 21 and 22 specifically deal with Lok Adalats. They have been organised by the State
Legal Aid and Advice Boards with the aid of District Legal Aid and Advice Committees. These have
helped poor people to avoid the inefficiencies of litigation. The aim of The Legal Services Authorities
Act was to provide access to justice for all, whether he be poor or rich. Since the poor masses of the
society were not being delivered on this promise, this Act was formed. This access has been further
strengthened by judgements of various courts, such as the Delhi High Court, in the case of Abul Hasan
and National Legal Service Authority v. Delhi Vidyut Board & Ors. AIR 1999 Del 88, where it gave
an order for setting up permanent Lok Adalats. Further, the decision given by the Lok Adalat is binding
and shall be treated akin to the order of a civil court, thereby increasing poor people’s access to justice.

9
 THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

 CONCILIATION

Conciliation is a valuable process that plays a pivotal role in resolving disputes and conflicts. It serves
as a bridge between parties who find themselves at odds, offering them a path towards reconciliation
and understanding. Through conciliation, individuals or groups in conflict can engage in open and
constructive dialogue, facilitated by a neutral third party, with the aim of reaching a mutually
agreeable resolution.One of the key strengths of conciliation is its emphasis on collaboration and
communication. Unlike more adversarial methods of conflict resolution, such as litigation or
arbitration, conciliation fosters an environment where participants can actively listen to each other's
concerns and perspectives. This can lead to the discovery of common ground and innovative solutions
that might otherwise remain hidden. Furthermore, conciliation is often a quicker and less costly
alternative to legal proceedings. It allows parties to retain more control over the outcome and can lead
to outcomes that are more tailored to their unique needs and circumstances. In a world where disputes
can escalate quickly, conciliation offers a peaceful and structured means of finding common ground,
repairing relationships, and ultimately, moving forward in a spirit of cooperation. Conciliation is a
process that promotes dialogue, understanding, and compromise, making it an essential tool for
resolving conflicts in a civilized and effective manner. It highlights the human capacity for empathy,
cooperation, and problem-solving, ultimately contributing to a more harmonious and just society.

Section 61 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 provides for the Application and Scope of
Conciliation which points out that the process of conciliation extends, in the first place, to disputes,
whether contractual or not and they must arise out of the legal relationship. In a dispute, one party
has the right to sue and to the other party the liability to be sued. But Part III of the Act does not
apply to such disputes. Section 63 of the act fixes the number of conciliators. Ideally, one conciliator
is required but the parties may by their agreement provide for two or three conciliators. The parties
have to agree on the composition of the conciliation tribunal when the invitation to conciliation is
acknowledged. In the absence of any agreement to the contrary, there shall be only one conciliator. If
both parties fail to appoint a conciliator with consent, the same may be conducted by two conciliators
(maximum limit is three), then each party appoints own conciliator, and the third conciliator is
appointed unanimously by both parties. The third conciliator so designated shall be the directing
conciliator. The gatherings to the discretion understanding as opposed to selecting the conciliator
themselves may enroll the help of an organization or individual in their decision for the arrangement
10
of conciliators. In any case, the establishment or the individual should keep in view during
arrangement that, the conciliator is free and unbiased. Section 67 of the act describes the role of the
conciliator as-The conciliator shall assist the parties in an independent and impartial manner in their
attempt to reach an amicable settlement of their dispute. The conciliator shall be guided by principles
of objectivity, fairness and justice, giving consideration to, among other things, the rights and
obligations of the parties, the usages of the trade concerned and the circumstances surrounding the
dispute, including any previous business practices between the parties. The conciliator may conduct
the conciliation proceedings in such a manner as he considers appropriate, taking into account the
circumstances of the case, the wishes the parties may express, including any request by a party that
the conciliator hear oral statements, and the need for a speedy settlement of the dispute. The
conciliator may, at any stage of the conciliation proceedings, make proposals for a settlement of the
dispute. Such proposals need not be writing and need not be accompanied by a statement of the
reasons therefore.

A conciliator is also expected to review relevant documents and information to help reach
conclusions. Meet with witnesses and other persons related to the parties to obtain statements and
additional information about the dispute in question and practice confidentiality regarding the
personal information of the parties and of the dispute. A brief written statement of all the issues faced
by the parties is to be submitted to the conciliator before the process of conciliation. A positive
dialogue and an atmosphere of comfort is to be created by the conciliator in order to promote
harmonious and cooperative problem- solving between the parties. In India conciliator plays an
evaluative role where he attempts to get the gatherings to acknowledge the benefits and demerits of
their cases along these lines driving them to a general adequate arrangement. Along with being well-
educated, a conciliator should impact the parties with his/her personal and convincing skills and play
a proactive role in reaching an agreement.

Section 80 places two restrictions on the role of the conciliator in the conduct of conciliation
proceedings: Clause (a) prohibits the conciliator to act as an arbitrator or as a representative or
counsel of a party in any arbitral or judicial proceeding in respect of a dispute which is subject of the
conciliation proceedings. Clause (b) of prohibits the parties to produce the conciliator as a witness in
any arbitral or judicial proceedings. Either of the parties to the dispute can commence the conciliation
process. The conciliation proceedings are said to have been initiated when one party invites the other
party for the resolution of their dispute through conciliation. The process commences when the other
party accepts the invitation. If they reject it, then no conciliation proceedings will be conducted for

11
that dispute. The invitation should identify the subject of the dispute. If no reply is received by the
inviting party within 30 days then it may be treated as rejection to conciliate.

PROBLEM

Mr. Ali, registered owner was riding his motorcycle from Kowdiar towards Peroorkada when he
reached near palace junction and waiting for his turn he got the signal and moved the bike slowly
with care and caution while so a car owned and driven by Mr. Christy the respondent that came
from Kuravankonam side towards Raj Bhavan and he drove the car ignoring the red signal towards
right in a rush and negligent manner and dashed against the motor cycle driven by Mr. Ali on its left
side in the said impact. Mr.Ali fell down and sustained injuries including a fracture on his right
elbow. Immediately he was taken to medical College hospital and he underwent surgery .The
rashness and negligence on the part of the respondent is the sole reason for the accident with respect
to this incident police registered the case against the respondent under section 279 and section 338
IPC after investigation, police filed charge sheet against Mr Christy. A petition was filed O.P (MV)
100/2022 against the respondent who is the owner and driver of the offending vehicle seeking a sum
of ₹ 1,00,000/- as compensation. Respondent resisted the claim. He admitted he is the owner cum
driver of the car at the time of accident but he disputed the negligence and contended that there was
no negligence on his side and petitioner drove the motorcycle in rash and negligent manner and hit
on the front side of the car and he fell down and sustained injuries. This respondent was driving the
car slowly with high caution therefore there was no negligence on the part of the respondent and this
respondent is not liable to be compensated.

12
 FACT IN ISSUE

1. Whether the negligence was either on the side of the petitioner or respondent?

2. Whether the petitioner is entitled to get compensation from the respondent? If so, what is the
quantum?
3. What order as to cost?

13
SCRIPT OF THE PLAY

CONCILIATOR: Adv. Amritha Sekhar

PARTIES: 1. Mr Ali Ahmed (Petitioner)

2. Mr Christy John (Respondent)

INTRODUCTORY SESSION

(2 SCENES)

SCENE I

[Setting: A conference room in a government building where the Conciliation is taking place. The
atmosphere is tense, and emotions are running high]

(Conciliator kicks off the meeting with a formal introduction of himself detailing his credentials. He
then for the purpose of records requests each member to formally introduce themselves)

CONCILIATOR: Good Morning all. I am Adv. Amritha Sekhar, a practicing lawyer and appointed
conciliator for this case. I have been practicing as a conciliator fir the last 6 years. As your
conciliator, I am here to resolve the disputes between both the parties and to reach an amicable
settlement for the same. You can feel free to address your respective grievances and issues based on
your reasonable interest. And as a conciliator, I promise to act in an independent, confidential, and
impartial manner. I also will be binding by the principles of objectivity, fairness and justice while
reaching a proper settlement for resolving the disputes between you. First of all, I should clarify that
I have no connection with this case. I will do everything in my power to assure that the process
remains confidential. Our goal here is to reach an agreement. So before we begin to discuss and
resolve the issue in hand, both of you can introduce yourself and your respective involvement and
interest in the matter. I will facilitate the discussion and guide us finding common ground.

CONCILIATOR: The purpose of today’s session is to explore the possibility of reaching a

mutually agreeable resolution to this matter without the need for a lengthy legal process.
 SCENE II

CONCILIATOR: To begin, please introduce yourselves.

ALI AHMED: My name is Ali Ahmed aged 30. S/o Ahmed working at Technopark,
Kazhakoottam, Tvm.
Sharing emotional impact [Mr. Ali shares his emotions]
ALI AHMED: This incident has had a profound impact on my life. It was a day I will never forget,
as it resulted in severe injuries, including a fractured right elbow. The physical and emotional toll
has challenging, and I am here today in the hopes of finding closure and justice.
CHRISTY: I am Christy John, aged 25 years. I am a photographer, residing in Aakulam,
kazhakootam, Tvm.
Sharing emotional impact: [Mr. Christy shares his emotions]
CHRISTY: This incident has been quite unexpected and unsettling for me as well. It has been a
stressful situation, and I believe it’s essential to clarify my perspective on the events that transpired.
I am here with the hope of resolving this matter amicably.

PRESENTING SESSION
SCENE III
CONCILIATOR: Mr. Ali, would you like to start by summarizing your perspective on the incident
and the reasons you believe that Mr. Christy was negligent? Please keep your statement concise.
ALI AHMED: I was riding my motorcycle from Kowdiar towards Peroorkada that day, and I was
extremely cautious. As I approached the Palace Junction, I waited for my turn at the signal. When
the signal turned green, I started to move my motorcycle slowly and with great care. However, at
the very moment, a car owned and driven by Mr. Christy, the respondent, came from the
Kuravankonam side towards Raj Bhavan. To my shock and dismay, Mr. Christy completely ignored
the red signal and made a reckless right turn in a rush. He did so in a negligent manner, and our
vehicles collided. It was his car's left side that struck my motorcycle on its left side. The impact of
the collision caused me to fall off my motorcycle, resulting in injuries, including a fracture in my
right elbow. It was abundantly clear that the rashness and negligence on Mr. Christy's part were the
sole reasons for this accident.Following the incident, the police conducted an investigation and
registered a case against Mr. Christy under Section 279 and Section 338 of the Indian Penal Code.
The evidence gathered during this investigation substantiated my claims. Subsequently, I filed a
petition, O.P (MV) 100/2022, against Mr. Christy, who is both the owner and driver of the
offending vehicle. In this petition, I sought compensation in the amount of ₹1,00,000 as a result of
the injuries and damages I suffered due to the accident. However, Mr. Christy has resisted my
claim. While he admits to being the owner and driver of the car at the time of the accident, he
disputes the allegation of negligence on his part. Instead, he contends that it was I who drove the
motorcycle in a rash and negligent manner, ultimately colliding with the front side of his car. He
claims that he was driving his car slowly and with a high degree of caution, and therefore, there was
no negligence on his part. As a result, he believes he is not liable to compensate me.

SCENE IV

[Conciliator turns to Mr. Christy]

CONCILIATOR: Mr. Christy, please briefly share your perspective on the incident and why you
believe you were not negligent?
[Mr. Christy’s Defence]

MR. CHRISTY: Thank you, conciliator. I’d like to clarify that I am the owner and driver of the car
involved in the accident. While it is true that I was driving my car at the time, I dispute the allegations
of negligence and rashness. In my account of the incident, Mr. Ali was riding his motorcycle
recklessly, and he collided with the front of my car, not the other way around. I was proceeding
through the junction with caution and did not violate any traffic signals. The impact was sudden, and I
was unable to prevent the collusion .I firmly believe that I should not be held liable for the accident, as
I was driving responsibly. My car was moving slowly, and I had no intention of causing harm.
Therefore, I should not be required to compensate Mr. Ali for the damages and injuries he claims to
have suffered.

CONCILIATOR: Mr. Ali, could you please elaborate on why you believe Mr. Christy was negligent
in this situation?

MR. ALI: Certainly. As I mentioned earlier, I was following traffic rules, and the signal was in my
favor. I started moving my motorcycle slowly and carefully. Mr. Christy's car, however, appeared to be
rushing and ignored the red signal, which resulted in the collision.

CONCILIATOR: Mr. Chrsity, do you have any evidence or witnesses to support your claim that you
were driving slowly and cautiously?
MR. CRISTY: I believe the absence of any traffic violations. I may not have medical records, but I
have spoken to some witnesses who were present at the scene. They will attest that I was driving
cautiously, and it was Mr. Ali who made an abrupt and rash movement, leading to the accident. I
understand Mr. Ali's pain and suffering, and I am sympathetic to his situation.
CONCILIATOR: Mr. Ali, what specific compensation are you seeking, and can you provide
documentation to support your medical expenses and other damages?
MR. ALI: I am seeking compensation of ₹1,00,000 to cover my medical expenses, including the
surgery, as well as compensation for the physical and emotional suffering I endured due to the
accident. I have all the medical records and bills as evidence
MR. CHRISTY: (nods) I am genuinely sorry about the accident, Mr. Ali. It was unfortunate incident.
MR. ALI: (Appreciates the sentiment) Thank you for saying that. It's just been tough dealing with
the aftermath.

MR. CHRISTY: I understand. I never intended for any of this to happen.

MR. ALI: (curious) Mr. Christy, why did you dispute the negligence in your response? I was
following the traffic rules, and the police report supports my claim.

MR.CHRISTY: (defensive) Well, I believe the situation was a bit more complicated. I mean the
police report is one side of the story, right?
CONCILIATOR: In Pazhaniammal’s case, the High Court that the Police report can be accepted as a
proof of negligence.
MR. ALI: (Raises an eyebrow) Complicated? How so?
MR.CHRISTY (Explains) You see, I remember stopping at the red signal, but I felt like you
suddenly swerved in front of me. It all happened so fast.
MR. ALI (Surprised) That is not how I remember it. I was waiting for my turn, and when the signal
turned green, I proceeded cautiously. It was your car that came rushing.
MR. CHRISTY (Frustrated) Look, Mr. Ali, I understand you're going through a tough time, but I was
driving carefully. I wasn't in a rush, and I certainly didn't want this accident.
MR. ALI (Gently) I get that accidents can be unexpected, but my injuries have been quite severe, and
I need help with the medical bills.
MR. CHRISTY: (Sympathetic) I wish there was a way we could resolve this without going through a
lengthy court battle.
 CONSENSUS SESSION

SCENE V

Conciliator: We will discuss the key issues at hand, primarily: Was negligence on the part of Mr.
Ali, or Mr. Christy, a contributing factor to the accident? Should compensation be awarded to Mr.
Ali, and if so, what should be the quantum? We will also consider any costs associated with this
conciliation process.

Conciliator: Thank you, Mr. Christy, for sharing your perspective and defense. We have now heard
from both parties, and it's clear that there are differing accounts of the events leading to the accident.

Conciliator: At this stage, I would like to emphasize the importance of finding a resolution that is
agreeable to both parties and that takes into account the interests and concerns of each side. I will
facilitate a discussion to explore the potential for a settlement.

Conciliator: It is now time to consider whether there is room for a mutually acceptable solution. Mr.
Ali, considering Mr. Christy's assertion that he was driving cautiously and that you were driving in a
rash and negligent manner, do you have any willingness to consider a settlement that might involve
compensation? If so, what terms or conditions would you propose?

SCENE VI

[Mr. Ali's Response]

MR. ALI: I appreciate the opportunity to discuss this matter further. While I maintain that Mr.
Christy's actions were the primary cause of the accident, I also recognize the importance of finding a
resolution. I would be willing to consider a settlement that includes compensation, but I would need
assurance that my medical expenses and losses are adequately covered.
[Conciliator turns to Mr. Christy]

CONCILIATOR: Mr. Christy, considering Mr. Ali's willingness to explore a settlement, what are
your thoughts on the matter? Do you see any potential for an agreement, and if so, what terms or
conditions would you propose?
Mr. Christy: Thank you, Conciliator. I appreciate Mr. Ali's willingness to consider a settlement.
While I maintain my position that I was not negligent, I also understand the desire to avoid a
protracted legal process. I would be open to discuss the settlement that reflects a fair assessment
of the situation and considers both parties' concerns.
Conciliator: Thank you both for your willingness to engage in this discussion. It's clear that there is
a willingness to explore a settlement. To move forward, discussions on the quantum of
compensation, if applicable.
Mr. Ali: Agreed.
[Reaching a Settlement]

Conciliator: It seems that we have reached an agreement on a settlement amount of ₹75,000

ascompensation for Mr.Ali.
[Confirming the Agreement]

Conciliator: Mr. Ali and Mr. Christy, is this understanding of the settlement amount accurate? Are
both parties in agreement with this resolution?
[Finalizing the Agreement]
Mr. Ali: Yes
Mr. Christy: Yes

Conciliator: If so, we can proceed to document the terms of the settlement and address any
remaining details. This would bring our conciliation process to a successful conclusion.

[Note: The final settlement agreement would include details of the compensation, payment
arrangements, and any other relevant terms agreed upon by both parties]

[Conclusion]
Conciliator: Thank you Mr. Ali and Mr. Christy for their willingness to engage in a constructive
dialogue and find a resolution to this matter. Our conciliation process has proven successful in
reaching an agreement that is fair to both parties. I will assist in documenting the final settlement
agreement, and once it is signed, this matter will be considered resolved.
[Signing the Settlement Agreement]
[The parties review and sign the settlement agreement, and any necessary arrangements for
compensation are made.]
 Conciliator: With the agreement now signed, I declare this conciliation process officially concluded.
I wish both parties the best moving forward, and I hope this resolution brings closure to the matter.
Thank you for your cooperation and participation.
Mr. Ali: (Smiles) Well, I must say, I didn't expect us to come to an agreement, but I'm glad we did.
Mr. Christy: (Nods) Agreed, Mr. Ali. It's a relief to have this behind us.

Mr. Ali: (Grateful) I want to thank you for your willingness to resolve this matter through
conciliation. It's been a challenging journey, but I believe this is the best outcome for both of us.
Mr. Christy: (Sincerely) I also want to express my gratitude, Mr. Ali. This settlement allows us to
move forward without the burden of a lengthy court battle.
Mr. Ali (Curious) So, how do you feel about the terms of the settlement?
Mr. Christy: (Content) I think it's fair, given the circumstances. It provides you with the
compensation you need for your medical expenses and suffering, and it acknowledges that there may
have been some shared responsibility for the accident.
Mr. Ali: (Appreciative) I'm glad to hear that. I believe it's a fair resolution too, and it will help me
cover my medical bills and the ongoing treatment for my injuries.
Conciliator: Now that we've reached an agreement, we'll take care of the necessary paperwork to
formalize the settlement.
ds) Yes, and I'll ensure that Mr. Christy fulfills his part of the agreement promptly.
Mr. Ali: Once again, Mr. Christy, thank you for cooperating. I hope we can both put this incident
behind us and move on with our lives.
Mr. Christy: (Shakes hands) You're welcome, Mr. Ali. I share the same hope, and I wish you a
smooth recovery.
Conciliator: (Smiles) Well, gentlemen, I must say, it's always heartening to see parties come to an
agreement. Congratulations on reaching a settlement.
Mr. Ali: (Relieved) Thank you, and thanks to your guidance, Conciliator. It's been a long road, but
I'm glad we could find common ground.
Mr. Christy: (Agrees) Indeed, this process has been quite helpful in resolving our differences,
and I appreciate your assistance, Conciliator.
Conciliator: (Satisfied) Great to hear that you both find the terms fair. We'll proceed to formalize
the settlement and handle the necessary paperwork.
Mr. Ali: (Extends a hand to Mr. Christy) Mr. Christy, I appreciate your willingness to cooperate and
find a resolution. I hope we can both move forward from this incident.
Mr. Christy: (Shakes hands) Likewise, Mr. Ali. I wish you a full and speedy recovery.
Conciliator: (Smiles) With the settlement agreed upon and the case resolved, I want to commend
both of you for your willingness to work together and find a fair resolution.
Mr. Ali: (Grateful) Thank you, Conciliator. It wasn’t easy, but it was the right thing to do.
Mr. Christy: (Nods) Indeed, it’s a relief to have this behind us.
 DECISIONS

“At this point, both parties, Mr. Ali Ahmed and Christy John, have agreed on the following
conditions for resolving the ethical dilemma and legal consequences .
The common points flagged may be summarised as follows. (Recording the settlement in the form
of an arbitaral award on agreed terms under Sec.30 (2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996)
1. Mr. Christy agrees to pay Mr. Ali the sum of ₹75,000 as compensation for the injuries
and damages resulting from the accident.
2. Mr. Christy acknowledges that his actions played a role in the accident, and he agrees to cover
Mr.
3. Ali's medical expenses and other associated costs.
4. Both parties agree to withdraw any pending legal actions related to this incident, including the
police case and the O.P (MV) 100/2022 petition.
5. Mr. Ali releases Mr. Christy from any further liability related to this incident upon receipt of
the agreed-upon compensation.
6. This settlement represents a final resolution of all claims and disputes arising from the accident.
[The group members, including Mr. Ali Ahmed and Christy John , in agreement with the
settlement terms and other parties ]
These agreed-upon conditions will be formalized in a written settlement agreement to ensure clarity
and adherence to the resolution. The parties involved will sign this agreement, and the terms will be
carried out accordingly.

Agreed and Signed with date by

Sd/- Sd/-

Mr. Ali Ahmed Mr. Christy John

 SETTLEMENT /CONCLUSION SESSION

[Conciliator is seen showing her interest to close in on the consensus]

UNIVERSITY

SL CLASS ROLL NAME REGISTER ROLE ASSIGNED

NO: NO NUMBER

1.

2.

3.

CONCILIATOR: I appreciate both the parties that we have reached to a settlement and thanks to
all. I would like to read the settlement [SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE
ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996]

Date:

STUDENT DETAILS

23