Good evening friends as we go live on the Facebook, YouTube as well as on this platform to understand what we all commonly said and when we were coming on the same page with the resource person that is Justice Dr. Dr. Vinit Kuthari, a judge of the Gujarat High Court, Niranjan Bhatt, a senior mediator and a senior trainer, Mr. Ajay Jawad, a senior mediator and a trainer and who has come on this platform many times along with Justice Kuthari on a different topic. Thereafter we requested also, as Sushila senior advocate, senior trainer and mediator and also Mr. Prashant Chandra, they were kind enough to understand that the interesting facet of today's session was we requested the resource persons to connect immediately. And as they say that for remediation, the first format in which we all understand is one has to be large hearted so that all things could be creased and they say that if the resource person is a large hearted, he doesn't have the ego and he agrees to come on to share the knowledge because they all say that the trees which have the best fruits are always easy to be plucked and same are the resource persons who have good knowledge to be shared. And as I was saying that the, always a common question which comes around out in the mind of a participant, not as a participant or a people at large, as to whether there can be any pre-litigative mediation, let's assume a person comes to a common person as an advocate. He asked the suggestion, and if you suggest him that why don't you go for pre-mediation litigation. He says how can there be a pre-litigation mediation, that's the first question which comes in the mind of a person, that once there is no litigation, how can you refer a matter for mediation and what are the challenges and solutions. And we also find that large number of time people says you say that we have read it on the email or we have read it in the advertisements etc. That why don't you go for a private mediation which is not quote an explanation, quote an explanation would be that the case is pending before the court and the court says go to a trained mediator and then the matter is referred. These are certain challenges which even lawyers I have felt during this period of tenure where I have felt that being a mediator also a lot of people have this challenge within themselves as to whether it can be done. Needless to say that public at large does have this innovation or what you say feeling that such pre-mediation, pre-litigation mediation cannot be done and there cannot be a private mediator who can settle the matters, whether they will have a seal etc. I will not take much time and since we have speakers who have immense knowledge who can take the show solo on their own because like I have been myself being a trained mediator I have been trained under the ages of the On a virtual platform I have met my group who has trained us, a lot of lawyers in Punjab and High Court and in fact Pan India. And same is with Mr. Javad and with Mr. Prashant Chandra we had and just to talk to Vinit Kuthari who has been a judge at various places and he is an immensely popular person because we have been doing webinars which are pan India popular. A lot of people had sent me messages that he is a person where he goes it's an advantage to that court and the other court messes him by if he could have stayed and he could have given better challenges. He being closely associated with Gujarat Legal Services Authority. Where in they have also taken certain issues which Dr. Justice Vinit Kuthari would take us forward as to what are the roles of Legal Services Authority as such. And I will not take what all would be taken up as such I would request my brother Javad to give the insights how things would go forward and how we will go about with the session. And I am thankful to Mr. Prashant Chandra and ma'am Sushila to have agreed at our request to come on the platform. Yes sir. Before we take over can I say just welcoming all the learned dignities on this team. We have already touched a century of the participants on this team I just saw the numbers. And Madam Roshan Dalvi is also there a former judge and a very trained learned person I know her personally also very many people I would not name everybody. So it's a great pleasure to be in this webinar and mediation is as a subject is my first love in judiciary also. So I think whenever something about mediation happens or is about to happen. If I'm roped in and I've requested to join that I have nothing except a word. Yes. So I'm grateful to the co-panelists Mr. Javad and Mr. Milandan Bhattu is almost a Vishnu Pitama of the mediation movement in the country. And Madam Sushila and my dear friend Prashant Chandra who are great trainers and they are the life force behind the Bangalore Mediation Center is doing so well and I'm so grateful to them. Gujarati is under the hands of many learned people here. Mr. Sriram Pancho in Chennai, Mr. Javad very many. I mean I can't name it's a long list. And at my request Gujarat Judiciary people have joined I am presently heading Gujarat State Legal Society also. So I have a sense of responsibility also for taking this mediation movement forward. And there are various issues because since we are awaiting a new comprehensive law of mediation. There are various issues which we should keep on discussing so that at least the education and the good words about mediation go out in the public at large also. And referral judges, trained mediators and various people stakeholders I would say come to know of this movement and they can get the benefits of all this. And to begin the discussion we had requested Mr. Javad who is almost an international figure in the mediation field now. He is a accredited mediator from the Singapore Mediation Center in the event which I had the pleasure of attending also. And he is doing so many cases also. So let him begin set the ball rolling and then soon it will be converted into a participative kind of thing. So no first or second people everybody will be free so three, four speakers are to lead the discussion and then we'll throw open the house to mutual exchange of thoughts so that we all share the knowledge and make this movement a very popular movement. So Mr. Javad now I request you to kindly set the tone and set the ball rolling. Thank you. Thank you very much Mr. Srinath Patari. First of all, thank you to Vikash for giving me this opportunity to share the dais with two real stalwarts in the field of mediation. We all know about the contributions that Mr. Patari has made to the mediation movement. And we have been, Madras High Court has been a direct beneficiary of the kind of progressive and kind of proactive manner in which he has implemented the mediation here and he has promoted various activities. Now what is Madras High Court's loss I suppose is Gujarat High Court's gain today. So we are actually envious of Gujarat High Court that they have taken away Justice Patari from us. And as far as justice, I mean Mr. Niranjan Bhatt is concerned, whatever I may say will be like showing the, we have this saying in Hindi, Suraj ko Chirath dikhane ke marabha. So it will be like showing the lamp to the sun. So I don't think I really have the words to describe him because the way he has the energy that he brings, the inspiration that he gives, the motivation that he provides for us to move forward and to carry on with the work is something really phenomenal and we keep praying that God will bless him with a very long life and good health so that he continues to guide and motivate us. So friends, when we conceived this topic of pre litigation mediation, we had a short meeting between Justice Patari, Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Pekash and me to discuss how we should structure it. And both Justice Patari and Mr. Niranjan Bhatt felt that it should not be in the form of any speeches to be given by anyone, any form of presentation to be done. But it should be more in the nature of a conversation so that we can discuss what is mediation because there might be many people in the audience who may not be aware of what mediation is all about. And since we have some of the best minds over here, I'm not including myself in that. I'm just talking about Justice Patari and Niranjan, Sushila, this is Oshant Balvi. JP Seng has joined. These are all the great minds who have really steered this mediation movement forward in India. And how we have to carry it forward, how do we have to popularize it, how we have to make it as the first go-to option if any dispute arises, if there is any conflict. How do we make it the first option, the first port of call where parties can go to resolve the disputes and then explore the other, whether it is litigation or arbitration. So with that objective in mind, we have structured this discussion and we will be focusing more on how to popularize what is called as private mediation or pre-litigation mediation. So that it doesn't have to be that disputes have to go to the court, parties have to incur the cost, face all the travails that they have to go through and then come for mediation. Rather than that, how can parties take recourse to mediation even before they have to necessarily go through this painful process. So that is what we need by private mediation. And I will now request Jaswant Kothari Sahib and Niranjan Sahib to talk about this and whatever inputs that I can possibly make in this which might be very little. I would like to make there and I would invite Sushila Ma'am and Prashant to also give their inputs in this. And Jaswant Rosha Dalvi is here and I had the benefit of listening to her once in one of the conferences where she spoke. And it was very insightful, very enlightening if I may call it that. So it was a very enlightening experience to listen to her, the kind of passion she brings and the kind of commitment that she has. And the sheer brilliance that she brings to the whole presentation that she makes. So we are very privileged to have so many people here. So I would now like to invite the speakers to start. Javed, you have not exactly told us what you are, but we have come to know all about you. So please be generous enough to accept your exceptional ability as a mediator. Sir, so far as Gujarat is concerned, we are quite lucky after a long, long time that we have justice Kothri with us. And so I need you made us jealous in the past.  Yes. Now, coming to the subject, my friends. Very important thing is how to make the mediation go in India. We have done quite a good job MCPC Supreme Court has established court annex mediation. So I was considering what are most important things to make private mediation pre institutional mediation success in India. And if I summarize a few points which we can elaborate later on, I feel that most important thing is wheel of the parties to settle, because at present we find in mediation that parties are fighting even in mediation. They will have to lead them to come to mediation with a keen desire to settle. And the important thing is that the mediators will have to establish themselves as outstanding mediators, so that the, the, the product of mediation is elaborated all over the country and people come to know what a brilliant mediator can do. And therefore, the strategy, which is to be adopted is strategy of one Chinese mediation, Chinese military chief Sun Zhu. And so I said when Sun Zhu meets Roger Fisher, then mediation can develop. So first we have to win all without fighting. Avoid getting intact. Avoid attacking the strength and attack weaknesses. Know yourself, your competitors, prepare carefully, change the game by your terms, choose leaders of good character. And as Roger Fisher says, in getting to us, focus on interest, not on positions, separate people from problem, all these fundamentals of mediation will have to be properly digested by all the mediators. So we will have to prepare for winning more territories markets without damaging the key assets, namely consumers and without fighting the current occupiers legal industry. We have to invent new options. Therefore mediator will have to first totally equip them themselves with the abilities to make people feel that the personality which is walking in mediation is the person who will encourage people to settle who will establish the mediation product in India and there will be below to have a complete qualitative performance in give his practice signature. Therefore, that is one aspect. Third aspect which is important is building the trust as a mediator, then understanding the question that both parties may have to get something for a mediation agreement to come through. So these are creating more options for settlement. All these important things will have to be established and therefore mediator will have to equip themselves with knowledge, full knowledge, understanding convincing abilities, try to understand and how to listen people kept So all those basic qualities of the mediator will have to be perfectly digested by mediator. So that is second important point in this mediation. Then comes the establishment of mediation institution. All these fundamentals will have to be taken care of and then will come mediation as a product is acceptable to all and therefore friends on these basic issues will have to develop our discussion further and important role which judges will also play in promoting mediation also is another important aspect. So on these points I feel that our discussion should be developed further today. Sir, thank you. Thank you, Mr. But I think very nice thing you said about it and friends, we are yet to sell the idea of mediation to the people at large. People when they raise dispute or fight in our country, a party will generally says to other, I will see you in the court. This is the dialogue which is the, you call it filmy dialogue or whatever, but that dialogue has really turned our court system upside down. We are really so much over burdened the core system that almost you can, one can say justice within a comma is either not delivered or delivered so related that it becomes almost meaningless. So the whole idea has to change everybody wants peace and dispute is one thing to say, but the idea of mediation has not permeated all through in our country has not settled down with the people at large common. So we have to sell the idea of mediation to the people. For that two or three important things which I have have occurred to me and I keep on thinking about them. Firstly, we have to have Mr. But rightly said we are very large pool of good trained mediators is required, which is lucky. As of now we have only MCPC trained mediators, and in four I course which I have served, I have seen almost 25% of the mediators almost inactive and 75% active but only first 25% of the pool doing the real good job. So we have to refurbish the whole system of training in our country so that more and more 10 mediators become available. One of my suggestions which I've shared with us also is that now unity have to run some special courses even for the 15 years plus advocates who are presently eligible to take MCPC training. Their short courses should be recognized by MCPC or on the Supreme Court till the new law comes so that we have a larger pool of people advocates of course, and then they are available as mediators to sort out various disputes in the process. So a larger pool of mediators is a secondly, the role of advocates where the disputant parties first approaches when they think of raising a dispute in the court. Their mindset has to completely get overhauled or changed. Now, it is very difficult to change advocates mindset because they have their professional interest at this with the law practice. Now to become mediation as an important part of the law practice, we have to have a mindset with the lawyers that whenever the parties come to them, instead of sending them to the taking them to court rather, they can suggest mediation as the first platform where they should try their effort or try their luck or whatever dispute which they have. Now they are the problems of participation of the other parties will come. So now we need some kind of legal provisions statutes where the other parties can also be requested summoned or brought in a common platform before the court spaces are seen by the disputant parties. So not only we have to have law, but the mindset first of all, that's why I said sell the idea of mediation. Now these two three things are very important to set the, to make this movement popular. Now pre litigation, which is before you go to the court is now of course mandated by some of the statutes like common this commercial course section 12 a companies or section 442, etc. consumer disputes resolution family laws, etc. But the whole anxiety of the common man is, will it be enforceable agreement? Will it be a thing which I can claim as a matter of right that yes, it is my executable decree. Now these forms of course section arbitration act has been amended to make it a consolidated agreement enforceable, but people at large are not knowing this. We have to educate people at large. The whole system has to devote its attention, time and energy for throwing light on the aspects of the matters of which the people at large or advocates even larger section of advocates are also doubtful. So how to get the parties on the board, how to console them, how to try to arrive at immediate settlement and then how to make it an enforceable things between them or amongst them, where some are corporates, some are private parties, some are family dispute some are property disputes, brothers, etc. So various shades of things we have seen. So certain aspects are yet to be institutionalized in the form of statutes. Certain things are yet to be even told to the common people in this area. So what I feel is that we all stakeholders, the so called mediators or trainers or referral judges or whatever. We have to educate more and more people about this movement and advances of this so that they really go for it willingly because this is the whole thing is a willing or voluntary process. You can't force anybody. Therefore, the need of the day is to educate them, sell the idea. On this aspect, may I request my special guest, our special guest today also to say a few words on this before we go to the next sub topic or whatever. So, Madam Sushila, can you, being very experienced person, can you guide us about this a little bit more? Thank you, sir. Taking a leap from where Mr. Niranjan Bhai and Justice Kothari sir have left. I would like to say that the greatest challenge we have today as far as this pre litigation mediation is concerned is, we have ignored or we have not given as much importance as much as we should have given by in the past 15 years to mediation advocacy. Until we strengthen this mediation advocacy, we can't do anything because the moment there is this dispute, the person about whom a disputing parties think of is an advocate only. Unless an advocate is trained in mediation advocacy and they consider it as part of their regular advocacy profession, we can't do anything. This pre litigation mediation can never, never, never be successful. For this, I request and I suggest that the Bar Council should be enrolled and the Bar Association should be enrolled irrespective of the years of experience that we have as professionals. Everyone should be asked to undergo this training in mediation advocacy for three days or four days, whatever it is. If we do that, then they know what exactly it is. And then they can take it a step forward and say to it that the personalized solutions can be availed by the parties who approach them. Personal solutions can never be given by the courts. If you are focusing at these personalized solutions, then it is only through mediation. And until we strengthen this mediation advocacy, I don't think we can go ahead. This is one of the challenges, greatest challenges we have. Another thing as you rightly pointed out, there is lack of statutory support here. I was going through this Alhabad High Court's Mediation Consolation Settlement Scheme, pose this judgment in She-in-Waastra versus Deepak's case. I don't think other, many other courts may or may not have, may not have done, I don't know. But I was very much, I mean, I really like the way in which they have formulated the scheme. Unless we have a statute in place, we should at least have some sort of a protocol that we amongst ourselves, the mediators, follow that. So that the absence of protocol that all mediators who are practicing private, who are in private mediation practice are adopting to themselves. So this is one thing that absence of protocol is another thing that we have to seriously take note of. And another thing is, supposing assuming for a well tomorrow there's a statute and we have this pre-litigation mediation, everyone is asked to go to pre-litigation mediation and come back to court. Do we have infrastructure? Yes, number of mediators. Number of mediators and can quote take the burden of providing them the infrastructure. It's impossible. So what do we do then? Again, we have to rely upon the private mediation only because we should say probably we may have to say that you have to go through, pass through the test of pre-litigation mediation and then come here. But the entire logistics and everything cannot be provided by the court system. That's one thing. That's where what happens is, many of the advocates for very good mediators also, they are now taking mediation as a complete profession for them. Because they don't know whether they have, if it comes to their bread and butter, whether they can depend upon mediation or not, I don't know. So in order to switch to that, at least in the temporary stage, what needs to be concerned and what needs to be taken care of is that the system should give complete freedom to the mediator to structure the mediation. In concurrence with the disputing parties and other participants who have to participate. Very right. Because unless both the sides or all learned advocates to whom the parties go, have the same kind of mindset to direct their parties to the mediation table first. It will be a difficult process because the advocates will not have the powers to summon. And that where a statute to support may also be required. Madam Dalvi, what is your view on this? Then I turn to Prashant. Just a minute. Just a minute. Mr. Vikas, sorry, you will have to be unmuted by the host. Yes, now you can. Thank you. Madam, now you can speak. Good evening, your Lordship. There are so many illustrious persons that I don't think I could say anything. I'm writing down my notes to learn more. But I could say just three or four things from my experience and taking from what Madam Shishila also just now said. One is, you know, if we are going to have a kind of a pool of mediators who as she said must have a full time job kind of, you know, of mediation so that they are directed into mediation. Two persons hit me. One is the youngest and one is the oldest. Young lawyers in the law colleges and going into masters degree courses would make very good mediators because as they say, train them young, it is forever. We are having this program in TISS, Tata Institute of Social Sciences where I give certain lectures every year. And one of my lectures is a full day course, four hours or eight hours on mediation.  This must be done with client counseling so that each one when they come out and when they are ripe enough to become lawyers. From the beginning, they counsel their own clients that way that, you know, this will be nice, etc. And I tell them, I give them examples. Like for example, in family matters, in administration suits, in commercial causes and agreements, etc. How would you do that? You know that? The second group is at the fag end, the retired judges. Now I do some mediation. I do mediation online now in this COVID day. It is working very well. I am developing it as my own way. You know, I have a full day mediation. I tell the parties, you can say whatever you want. Then I have a caucus. When we end the meeting and you doubt the party who has begun the petitioners or the plaintiffs, if they have started, then we'll have another meeting after sometime. I give them half an hour rest in between and then we come back. A whole day goes into that. Sometimes it does not materialize, but still with that impasse will leave and the parties can take it forward. The germ of settlement must be there. That much can be done. The next meeting can be taken. One more thing is I do my arbitrations. At the end of the arbitrations, I make my award and I keep it ready. I call both the parties in the morning at 11 o'clock. I tell them I am not going to charge any more fees because you have paid my fees of arbitration. I am prepared to give you one whole day. Now you see the parties will never tell me everything again because we have just finished the arguments and I do my awards quite quickly. So after another seven days, 10 days, whatever, when I give the award, everyone knows whatever they have argued. Now they tell me the inside story. I tell them what is your inside story. So they ask me, can I get my brother, my father-in-law, call everyone. And one day I give myself and them. And at the end of it, some matters have been settled. Some matters have not been settled. If they settle, I would tear out my award. I don't serve the award. We make the agreement. If they don't settle, I serve the award so that one stage is over. Now they will go for enforcement of a challenge. They will think. I believe they will think. In one of my matters, one lady tells me, Madam, I didn't do anything wrong when she just left. Because it just, I mean there was a little impasse and some other party said, get up. No. I cannot force and I cannot pressurize. So I told her, I said, you please think, I can't tell you now. He's gone away. Very good. So two very good points they made, catch them young on the education field and catch them old also when they're mature. Yes. They have the time and they have the experience. I would just like to add before we go to Prashan, a very important point with this resolution that we had made, catching them young. Because I have a lot of experience in training youngsters in mediation and legacy from the law colleges and especially for when I prepare them and they prepare for competitions. I am requested by them to portion. Now what I find is that there's a huge pool of talent that is lying over there under. Now, unfortunately, even in the court annex mediation, we have brought in the rule that lawyers should have 15 years of experience if they want to get trained as media. Now the difficulty it happens because by the time you get 15 years of experience, you're so entrenched in an adversarial mode of thinking that it becomes very difficult for you because you do everything that goes against the core of media. You advise, you analyze, you argue, you minimize, because all these are characteristics of unactive listening that we lawyers are trained. So, but what I find when I go when some many times we are invited by various universities and other organizations to judge the competitions, the mediation competitions and sitting over there. And supposedly judging those youngsters, I feel ashamed because the kind of skill that they demonstrate, the kind of knowledge and the abilities that they show, the talent that they show over there. I sometimes feel that we have no right to sit in judgment over there. We should call them for our live mediation and tell them that please give us feedback on what we are doing right and what we are doing wrong. Yes, you're right. I think this age limit of 15 years plus for advocates to get training is not with much of it and even younger people because they are really bright people. You should talk to them. Mr. Prashant, can you throw some light on our Bangalore Mediation Center? How the mediation pre-mediation is happening there and how to really get it enforced in Lokathala or golds or any experience of practical cases. Mr. Vikas, please unmute Mr. Prashant. After a brief from these special guests, we'll revert back to Mr. Bhatt and Javank of course. Good evening, sir. Good evening. Yes, sir. Thank you very much for the opportunity given. Before going to the question which you have posed me, sir, I further go on what you have said about educating the general public and Madam Roshan Dalvi also had said, I would still go further. Catch them. They are very young. Apart from this, maybe the seventh standard when they are there, maybe one hour of talk on what is mediation, pre-unistry levels, maybe two hour session on mediation. Because even if you ask a day old child, the moment you say, quote, it says delay. Because that's what it's come with now. Quote means negative. That quote word has become negative. That has to change. Yes. And today's youngsters are not tomorrow's going to be litigant, lawyers, judges, politicians and executives. So they have to know that quote is not just quote, it is also into mediation. In this regard, sir, I would like to say the legal services authority because you're also in charge of that probably have a greater role because they can bring in awareness, not just to the legal fraternity, that is to say the law colleges and the law students. It can be even to the management student. I know that medical colleges and engineering colleges are taught on constitution. Why not to the same medical colleges, management institutions and other colleges, even a degree college, maybe one hour, two or three hours on mediation. Because the very fact that tomorrow they are going to be litigants or they are going to be heading something where they will be also having some adjudicatory process, though not technically as legal. Some universities have now introduced mediation as their subject as a part of curriculum they are doing. Younger to them also because they become citizens with that orientation. At least of court there are other systems also. Sir, what I'm saying is mediation is not just limited to the advocates, judges and the litigants, it is also to the others. Everybody should know mediation. Coming to Bangalore Mediation Centre, sir, we are doing pre-litigation there apart from our court litigation section 89 mediation. We are all doing that. There are other stalwarts here also were present today. We are also having this Deepa Varsha Srinivasa Rakesh based on the pre-cleanings there that is directly rooted from 498A and the police companies, which are referred to the mediation. We have this pre-institution panel under the District Legal Service Authority, which is also doing well. And there are quite a few settlements that is to say only confining to commercial courts. I would say that has been a big game changer that has been doing a lot of work. So therefore I would say pre-institution mediation has picked up in Bangalore to my knowledge. I would say picked up from where who have volunteered to come. If you have not paid the money and got into mediation, it may not be attributed to the mediator for the failure. If they have come, participated, probably there is more success than failure there to my knowledge. Thank you. And Madam Sushila and Mr. Prashant Singh, you have written something about this subject I was informed. So please share that with me and Mr. Vikas also. You are that Elabadi scheme madam and you have written something on that. So please share it e-copy so that we can further distribute it and discuss more on this. Mr. Jawad, may I revert back to you to show, throw some light on the how a common man or advocates or litigants after pre-institution settlements or what are the courses open? Suppose they fail, they will institute the normal suit or petitions, whatever. If they succeed settlement, how do they really get it enforced, executed? What is the sanctity of a pre-litigation mediated settlement, etc.? What is the way forward on this? Can you throw some light and then Mr. Bhatt, of course. Yes sir. As you have rightly pointed out and also Sushila man has pointed out that it's very important that we need to have a law and exclusive law on mediation. And I think a lot of work has been done on that by a committee constituted by the Supreme Court and it hasn't submitted. But as things stand today, we don't have, apart from the fact that mediation is recognized in statutes like Section 89 and Companies Act and Consumer Protection Act and Commercial Courts Act. Nowhere is mediation defined, nor is the process prescribed anywhere. Nor the outcome, what happens if an agreement is reached and mediation is given in it. So what we normally do, private practitioners like us, when we do a private mediation, actually the way I have been shown by the Supreme Court in the AFCON scales, where the Supreme Court has said that if you do a private mediation, although it is in the context of Supreme Court observations are more in the context of matters that are referred by the court, but outside the scope of the dispute before the court. So if there's an agreement reached in matters that are not covered by the scope of the suit or any other proceedings that are there before the court, how that should be dealt with, that is what the Supreme Court has said. But what we do is we treat it as a conciliation procedure. And what we do is when the parties reach an agreement, we follow the process that is prescribed in the Part 3 of the arbitration and conciliation. So Section 74 talks about mediator authenticating the settlement agreement and it says that it will be deemed to be, that agreement will be deemed to be an award on agreed terms as described under Section 30 of the arbitration and conciliation. So what we do is we treat it as an arbitral award on agreed terms. So now the advantage of doing that is that it becomes executed for any party defaults or any party willfully defaults and complying with the terms of the agreement, which rarely happens actually. It should not happen in an mediated settlement agreement. There should be because we mediated settlement agreement can be reached only after both parties are fully satisfied that this is the best way to resolve their dispute. And it is their agreement, therefore normally parties comply with whatever they agree upon in case in the unlikely event that one of the parties has to enforce, it can always be enforced as an arbitral award as a court decree under Section 30 of the arbitration and conciliation. So that is the usual course that we follow. Is there a way out to approach to Lokadal in some manner with the mediated settlement and get a seal of some court or approve the court itself and then take a compromise decree on this? What is your experience on this? Or a mediated settlement just can be denied by the other party, then how to go ahead? Sir, now here the thing is, you have also shared with me what the Delhi High Court has done. And one of our mediator friends from Chandigarh, Monica Jalota had also sent me the format of pre-litigation mediation that the court and ex-centers do. So any party can apply to the court that they have a dispute and they would like to resolve it through mediation. And as for those rules, it says that it will be deemed to be an award on agreed terms under Section 74 of the arbitration and conciliation. So that is the procedure that they normally follow for pre-litigation mediation through the court. So it doesn't come back to the court, but it becomes an award in its own right. Now, as far as Lokadal is concerned, Supreme Court has equated mediation with Lokadal in as concepts. They said mediation and Lokadal are treated on par with each other. So if you apply that, then there's one more in my opinion. I would like to be corrected if I'm wrong. In my opinion, I think one more option would also be to treat it as a Lokadalata award. A mediation settlement can be treated as a Lokadalata award under Section 21, I think. So I'm not wrong. And all the legal services are correctly signed. So that is another option that is there. But I don't think anybody has explored that so far. But that option is certainly there. I would like to be corrected if I'm wrong by Mr. Narendra Bhattan. In this regard, I would like to share because I was a member of the committee. Shushila Ji was also a member of the 10 member committee. And we drafted, at the instance of MCPC, we drafted an exclusive mediation law, a bill. And it is forwarded to Supreme Court MCPC and they are forwarded to the government. In that law, there is a provision that the reference of private mediation, pre-litigation mediation, that also can be referred to the court panel for court annex mediation. That panel itself can also deal with pre-mediation. When it is desired by both the parties, they can be sent to the court annex mediation. And there also the mediation agreement itself is provided as an award in that law. So if that exclusive law of mediation will come, it will look after creation of a mediation council. It will look after the people who will be institutional members and they will be also providing services of mediation. Therefore, there will be another group or another committee which will also look after education of mediators to train them continuously. So all this provision is made in that law. That law is providing exclusive mediation which will cover not only court annex mediation. It will cover also mediation provided by 17 different laws. So every law has its own constitution for its own procedure prescribed. There are many inconsistencies in some of the acts. So this new law is trying to remove those inconsistencies. And there a law will be managed by mediation council in India. And they will look after not only training of mediation but they will also look after registration of mediators and granting them affiliation. And that's how mediators, sanctity, mediators, education, mediators, qualifications, mediators, trainings all also will be taking place. And only that mediator which is certified by the mediation council will be able to deal with it because we find today that many people start joining one program and then start doing mediation. They really don't follow the real mediation training which is given to them. Therefore, we'll have to check up whether even trained mediators are following it or not. Therefore, our conclusion today is that education of mediation is very important. Now, since we are providing for in commercial courts also we are providing for private mediation or pre institutional mediation. And it is rightly said by sociology that if there is no framework of ready mediators, what will we do. So first of all our concentration should be providing for mediation panel and that panel can be referred otherwise here reference provision is there. People can go but where, where are those trained mediators, where is their list, where people know, how are they are mediators, what is their signature as mediators. Therefore, first conclusion we must make today is that concentrate on training of mediators, concentrate on training of judges also make references. How to make reference in what cases to make reference. All those questions are very important and without that reference to pre litigation mediation provision will be meaningless. So we made an attempt in Gujarat under the leadership of justice MR Shah, who is now in Supreme Court that we visited every district of Gujarat, and we called all the litigants, all the disputants were not were not started litigation. So all those who have disputes from the people at large, there are NGOs, members of the police officers, all of them were assembled on weekend, and all of them were also explained as to how mediation will be introduced and what benefit they will get. Therefore, today, people come to mediation and they start disputing arguing as if they argue in the court. So that wasted a lot of time in convincing them that this is not argumentative procedure. Yes. And now since I am finding many referral judges also from Gujarat especially and members of district legal service authority also, I take this opportunity to urge them really, as I have been doing when I go to districts for the meetings with them also, that please try this method by referring more and more cases to the mediation. So the things will fall in place only if we do something. Yes. So unless there are cases in the mediation, what mediator will do and how the system will be utilized and how the fruits of that will be seen. So since the members are there, I would take this opportunity and two big areas of court annex mediation which attract always the attention of the judges, it's the burden to offload. And to me as a charter on them, it makes a your business sense to offload the burden of the course on to the mediation process. So there is always a good meaning. I am referring the cases to the mediation at any stage of the litigation, right from Supreme Court to the bottom civil judge. We have a complete team in Gujarat with your lordship and the secretary also very much ready. They are all active and I keep them whenever I go to them, I just urge them prompt them, activate them rather in the sense that please refer more and court cases and try your mediators so that you will know even the worth of the potatoes and the willingness of the parties to enter them. For example, section 138 cases whole bulk, the entire judiciary came under a great strain by section 138 amendment. So we have to take those cases to that stream and settlements will happen even if initially maybe in lesser percentage of cases gradually that will increase. So a large chunk of the commercial disputes in section 138 can probably be settled because as of now, the mediation is most popular. The mediation is most popular with the family disputes. But we have to commercial course act might have come with its amendment in 2015 also 2018. And one thing which I was to highlight I highlighted the other academies also section 12A amendment that is unfortunately according to me perhaps not adequately worded. That says that if you do not need interim relief you have to first go for the mediation as of course the provision should have been otherwise. They should have been automatic stay for six months or three months when the people are really given given the chance to try their luck in the mediation forum. So that is for the legislature to take up of course but then unless the parties have a safety wall or safety wall rather from the other side, they will not go willingly for the process of the provision should have been otherwise the automatic stay of the things or the status quo will be maintained till they try the mediation properly. Now things like that now there are various all shares of disputes which can come into mediation forum. And these are two big areas now third area which I would like your expert opinion of the co-panelists also and other experts also how to do something about government departments. Now 70% of the litigation is by or against the government departments. Many of them can be settled like revenue matters, land revenue matters, land acquisition compensation matters. They can be settled. The problem is a typical bureaucratic attitude, lack of proper guidelines for the officers to enter into settlements, the lack of proactive approach of the government departments to give it a fair trial to the mediation. Now these are the things where we have to really as an institution as legal service authority or a state mediators or experts or expert advocates or senior advocates. We have to like suppose for example somebody's advocate general. Can you not advise secretaries in a meeting that please give some cases for this mediation also give proper authority to the head of department to goes there and gets it done. Now these are the things where the steps have to be taken, maybe steps initially then they can be bigger steps also. What do you feel about these big chunks of litigation which can be settled through mediation process in court and next mediation. I do not know how far the pre litigation mediation can be involved in the against the government departments or by the government departments. Mr. Burton, then Mr. Javad of course anyone you want to or even others. Sir this will have to be dealt with in a very discrete manner. Can you feel that so far as telephone department is concerned their disputes they have found out a way to get the dispute settled by negotiation. So far as government is concerned. I think government can be motivated to join in mediation in such cases where government is likely to succeed. Probably. If you actually success in mediation then it is not mediation. So we have to select case by case and then persuade them to because they will agree to refer the cases where government is going to benefit. It's more a question of mindset. Yes Mr. Javad what is your opinion. Sir what I personally feel is that it is a question of culture. Because what is the kind of culture that we have established so far we have inherited bureaucracy and judiciary from the British. And we have we have learned how to identify things in binaries of right and wrong, good or bad. That is how we always our mind is thinking nowadays. And dispute resolution if you talk about it or conflict resolution has been the virtual monopoly of only certain set of people, lawyers, judges. It has not been given to anybody else except those who have usurped extra judicial authorities like politicals or policemen or goondas. They have usurped that dispute resolution authority from lawyers and judges, but it has remained the monopoly of lawyers and judges. And we are so used to thinking in terms of these binaries of right and wrong and good or bad as defined by the law that we have lost. I feel we have lost sight of the human element. Now I'm sure all of you have seen this movie Munna Bhai MBBS. Which one? Munna Bhai MBBS. In that what happens is the professor is pointing out to a patient and saying that this subject. So he keeps on referring to the patient as subject. So Munna Bhai stands up and says, Now what we do in our system is we call them as plaintiff, defendant, complainant, accused, petitioner, respondent, PW1, PW2, DW1, DWP. So we give them these normal places. Now where is the human element is what I want to ask. Because every disputant, every person who is in conflict is a human being. Every human being has a story. They have their emotions. They have their fears. They have their concerns. And that is where the challenge comes because do we have a system that addresses those that human element of a conflict or why the conflict has come. What are the fears or concerns that are driving the conflict? Now that pervades. The whole thing pervades. Not only in government disputes, but even in private disputes. And the only way of resolving it seems to be that we go to the court. As you said earlier, we'll see you in the court. So I will see you in the court. Yes. In 2007, I remember almost 14 years back when I conducted my first training program in Kerala, Hyderabad. Just Basant was there. He's practicing as a senior advocate of the Supreme Court. I remember his words. In fact, I noted down those words. I just want to say he says mediation reflects the maturity of a culture. Majority? Majority of a culture. Yes. Majority of a culture. So when we are children, we always go to our parents to resolve our problems. As we grow, we resolve our own problems. Now that is the kind of culture we need to assure him. And for that, we have to necessarily get rid of these monopolies. And we have to expand the field of dispute resolution, bring in the human element. And that is where mediation plays a very important role. Because mediation probably is the only dispute resolution mechanism which caters to that human element which recognizes the human element. Yes. Go ahead. I thought you had completed. Please go ahead. Before I request Madam Sushila also, your view, because in the absence of comprehensive law, which is in the making as of now, in the sense of the Supreme Court directions, do you feel that mediation movement in our country can take a firm footing? It can be a successful movement or without, because lawyers' interests, their fees, their statutory recognition, the equation of mindset, education, training, everywhere we are only proceeding inch by inch further. Of course, we are doing good, no problem, betting our back is okay. But in the absence of a comprehensive law, which is still awaited after your committee's recommendation, many other committees might have done something like that. Do you think what can be the more proper format or things to do in the present scenario awaiting the law on this subject? What should we do? More training, more matured mediators, more education, more mindset, more private mediation, more pre-medication mediation or we await only? What is your view? Sir, as of now, Yes. To present question to the previous question, I would suggest that there are n number of repetitions pending in every court, which is against government, where is where a writ of mandamus is sought for. Yes. What is the writ of mandamus? Consider my representation. I don't even ask them to consider this way or that way. I request them to consider the representation. Let us take it as a first step. Let us involve the government agencies, legal service authorities can do. Let us involve as Mr. Prashan said, let us involve some college students. Trained advocate general's office is there. There are trained mediators also and some other advocates are also there. They will all get us the list of the cases where only a prayer is made to consider representation. Just call the concerned authority or head of department and send those cases and they say, yes, we undertake to decide within three months. Let us involve the mediator there. Request the mediator to sit there and request the mediator to talk to the concerned revenue official. Revenue secretary or whosoever it may be. At least 3000 to 5000 cases from each high court will. Good solution. Just one point if I can add. I think the biggest question and problem that comes in resolving government disputes is that the question of immunity of the officer has set me. Now, he's always afraid that he settles tomorrow, maybe in some internal audit or maybe in some other forum. His decision will be called in question. Authority should come from the top. From the secondary concern should authorize that with these guidelines, you'll go ahead with this mediation process. What is this VDS schemes, Kar Samadhan scheme, Vivaat to Ishwas schemes. These are all actually to cut short the litigation. Now they can be done without these notified schemes also in a very routine manner. If the secretary concern authorizes the heads of department with given guidelines that you can go to the court and expedition and get it done. No questions asked. So this you are right because the officer should not come with their trembling hands and then sign something which they are not authorized to do. If you come to authority, that's right. I will just cut it short. So I just wanted like since you were talking about pre mediation litigation, we are saying that the court government could be involved. I feel that like what Sushila ma'am was saying that you should have the secretary and get the mandamus issue. That in fact a pre mediation step could be initiated if it can be done because let's assume you have served a notice or a representation. That particular aspect can be handled by a trained mediator or anybody who's been authorized. Then he can say yes, his representation can be considered and rejected. That particular aspect, that one particular step in clogging of the courts can be stopped in that process. Because the only hitch I find is that if it's a similar case also though they are instructions, my lords are aware that similarly should not knock the doors. But the issue is that once if they concede in one particular case that yes it is covered, then in that situation that concession would be more in the realm rather than in persona. Because they say that once you have agreed in a particular mediation case then you would have to agree on. What is your take on that? Mr. Vikas, the experience again for the government departments come into mediation process to my little experience is very very set because they just do not have an inclination to go for mediation in this system. They say let the court decide and if it's decided against them they go for further appeals. So the thing as rightly being pointed out by other experts is the mindset. Now mindset will also come in bureaucracy if the heads of the department or the concerned secretaries take this responsibility and authorize the heads of department to go for this system in the first instance. Because nobody in the government would like to burn his fingers. I can. And called into question. One thing can be settled is according to me. A rate is allowed and the court, the government has not gone in an appeal. Let's assume any matter. Rather than going for a contempt, normally we find that contempt nobody is holed up. But where you serve a lot of contempt it can be made a mandatory that you can have a pre-litigative mediation. Where in you say that once there is a final order, why haven't you settled it? Probably in that particular case and let's assume they don't settle it and you can file a contempt then you can be said that you would look. It's just like a pre-emptive choke on noting by proceedings under contempt would not be done. That eventuality, the parties can be holed up that yes you were given an opportunity, your officers were asked that there's a judgment staring out their face of it. Why didn't you settle it? Then if those offices are pulled up, I think a lot of litigation around 10% of the repudiation. Just one minute. If I can just add one more point I want to make because what we are talking about is before parties are forced to come to the court and file repudiation. How can matters be resolved? So one way of examining that would be that why don't we have these ombudsmen in every government department and day to day who can be trained in mediation. Who can be trained to go a little beyond what an ombudsman would normally do, go a little beyond that and try to resolve those issues that come up on a day to day basis by applying the mediation skills that they would have been trained in. That is one possibility that I just wanted to place before this. Yes, very good. I wanted to share one more aspect sir. In USA, mediation was started by community. In India, mediation has been started by judiciary. Leadership is taken by judiciary. The judiciary has its own limitation in public involvement and they can't directly persuade by public relations. Government has all the ability, all the materials. So if they start community centers everywhere, then probably governments involvement will be more. So here today government's involvement doesn't appear to be anywhere in mediation. That's right sir and that is why we feel like section 12A, there should be some law also because you see without the force of the statute, even a normal man does not fully want to abide or go for it. So much less the government departments where a typical bureaucratic mindset works without. Here sir. Yes, sir. In addition to what Madam Sushila and Java that just said and also Mr. Vikas. No person will file a case directly against the government. Usually if it is written for mandamus, it will be pre before a note after a note. So also in a civil suit section 80 is provided. So the same section 80 process of the duration can be used for mediation. Even if probably on the judicial side one or two orders come where the after the notice is issued and if the government has kept quiet for say three months and the repudiation is filed. Maybe I don't start using mediation. The problem there also is mindset. They just wait for suit to file after section 28, 80 period two months etc. So they wait for the things they don't take proactive steps to get the dispute resolved. And if the dispute has arisen because of their action or inaction where the mandamus rates are sought as pointed out by the London Madam Sushila. I have been in Bangalore, I quote 50 meters on the board were always mandamus rates and the only argument line was that it's a writ of mandamus. To which some of my responses might have been unhappy said why do you treat this court as a post office that we direct the other person to decide what he is otherwise also supposed to do. And since government is a major litigant when we are discussing something about ADR. I thought we should do something or at least send a strong message to the legislature or the new law which is making that there is a need to divert a attention to the government litigation also where mediation as ADR can solve a large problem. And because viewed from an overall angle, if your institutions cannot deliver much, then the reputation goes down. Like the reputation of the court system has gone down because of delays. God forbid that should not become the thing with the mediation. The whole question of mindset and government departments or government as such being a major litigant, I think something deserves to be done on that front also. And now, Mr. Bhatt, what is your overall analysis of the private mediation succeeding in this wave in this movement? What is your assessment and Mr. Javad also there. Sir, in my humble submission, I have found that those who attend mediation sessions and they see how mediation is being conducted.  I have heard some people say go to mediation because they have realized that in court it takes years and there the fight increases instead of going to resolution. They are going to fight there and their enmity increases everything. So we feel that those who understand what mediation is and what are the benefits of mediation. Today, they are more likely to go to mediation if they really understand. Therefore, we must attack the people at large in a very wide publicity manner, holding camps and everything and make people know that mediation is the real thing because that is Indian. Mediation is Indian and Britishers have washed our minds and dragged people to litigation only. Only way of solving is litigation. So that campaign has to be done and that's why I said government's involvement is more important in promoting mediation. They may not actually do trading part of it.  But here what happens are many people have come to mediation training. The commercial institutions also have organized mediation. Here we train number of people because first mediation training and they were taken mediators. They were not really people who were competent to be mediators. And when the mediators were attended mediators were trained after selecting group of people. MCPC said that unless you are trained by MCPC trainers, we can't recognize you. So the team of 30 to 40 mediators who are good mediators, trained mediators, they are not allowed to mediate. Therefore, they are now adverse to mediation. So that we also request you to say something in Gujarati because many Gujarati churches are here. No language bias, but just to make it more homely. Sir, we have delivered some speeches on mediation in Gujarati on TV about four or five times. And then people ask questions. They were very interesting. People liked it. So if we organize in Gujarati, people may like it more. Your message from a senior most mediator to all civil judges, district judges, lawyers who are in the meeting this meeting, what do you tell to them why they should go for mediation or why should they encourage mediation to their predicates? We should tell them that you settled your case yourself. In Gujarati, please. You settled your case. That should be your mindset. Time will come when others are not able to help. Everywhere we are told so far as medical care is concerned, do yourself. Traveling is concerned, do yourself. Okay. Medical aid, do yourself. Now we'll have to tell them settle your dispute yourself. If that idea is given to them in their mind, they will go to negotiation more than going to the court. Mr. Vikas, by now, if you have any questions from the audience or anybody. Sir, I'm saying it's a mediation. Normally we are having suggestions rather than questions. But only three questions would normally, if you would recollect what we were discussing yesterday. Yes. One of the issues is rather ethical implications. Is it a requirement? What does it mean? And look on the other countries' jurisdiction like Italy, Britain. And then what we talk of Singapore Convention. Mr. Jawad has a lot of insights on these Singapore Convention and all. How do we correlate these Singapore Conventions or foreign countries or ethical implications? Because a lot of people feel that I have reposed some faith in the mediator. Whether that glass ceiling, whether I have told something to my mediator. Whether I have told my mediator that the matter will not leak. And whether that mediator will maintain certain ethical values. Whether if I have reposed whether that mediator could blackmail. These are some top webs which creep on in the minds of a common man. So I will ask Jawad, how can these people be removed? It has some backing. Firstly, in a court in expedition, there are ethics and it's like there are control. There are checks and balances. Mediators are also pulled up if there is a breach of ethical values. And I will ask sir, just Qatari also. How do you pull up? Let's assume there is some breach. Like there's some officer, there's a premature retirement punishment. If this mediator does something, what happens? This also comes in the minds of people. Jawad, you tell me. Sir, I think just to go back to what Niranjan sir was saying just now. Essentially, one of the most important aspects that we need to focus on is the training of media. What is the quality of training that we are doing? Today, unfortunately, again, I come back to the main problem that whether we should really keep it as a monopoly of the legal community or should we expand it more? That is one twist. Apart from that, I think what kind of training are we going to really give them? Because when people come with a mindset, because we always, I'll just relate one small experience that I had while I was doing a media. It was a landlord and tenant dispute and the landlord walks into the mediation room and tells me that, sir, why should I come to you?  You have no power to decide anything. So what is it that you're going to be doing with you? So I smiled at him. I said, please sit down. And I told him that, look, who has the power if you go back from him? If you leave this room and go back, who has the power? He said, the judge has the power. I said, exactly. So the judge has taken the power and given it to you and told you that, look, it's your problem.  Here's the person who can help you to do that. So my job is only to help you to find your own solution. So if you're willing, I'm willing to help you. If you're not willing, you can go and tell the judge, I'm sorry, sir. I don't want this power. You take it back. The moment I said that he sat down, he went through the mediation and we said many times it so happens that parties come for a mediation because in court it is mandatory. So therefore they come for the mediation. They come with the mental makeup that this is not going to help us. We need to go back. But once you make them sit down and inform them about the process, what is the process? What it holds for them? What are the advantages that they have through this when the mediator's opening statement is made? They change their mind and they sit down there and they continue. So what I feel is one, number one, we need to first and foremost, we need to have a sort of a, in every statute, we should have a mandatory mediation. Provision, when I mean mandatory mediation, I'm not saying that they have to be compelled to go through the entire mediation process. But they should go for at least one session of mediation. That is what Italy is doing. So Italy has the top top model where parties are sent through at least one session of mediation. And they have found some incredible success. 70% of the disputes don't come back to the court at all. They get resolved in mediation. So once they understand the process. The second aspect, what I feel is a proper good training because this 40-hour training is not sufficient for becoming a good mediator. And the training has to include a lot of aspects about neuroscience, about emotional intelligence, about, you know, because I have been having this very interesting discussion with Radhika Shapurji of mediation mantras, where, you know, how a mediator's mindset should be cultivated and how a mediator should, what kind of thinking process and what kind of story mediator first of all should understand their own, you know, their own flashpoints, their own emotional weaknesses, have that understanding and then only you'll be able to deal with the problem of others. Coming to Vikash's question, I think we need to have clear-cut rules because one, we need a proper accreditation system in the country for accrediting mediators. Because without having an accreditation body, I think the statute provides for a Mediation Council of India on par with the Bar Council of India. So something to that effect where we have clear-cut rules because the mediation is a very confidential process and a lot of trust is involved and what people may not be doing in litigation, revealing their weaknesses that they may be doing in mediation. What they may not be doing in litigation. So it is a very sensitive process. So we need to keep evaluating mediators, whether they are really, you know, capable of rendering the kind of service that is expected of them. So I think we need to have clear-cut rules for accreditation and for removal of mediators if there is any serious breach of confidentiality or serious breach of ethics. So we need to have these ethical guidelines properly framed for them. So these are some of the things that I can... I have tried to introduce a kind of feedback system in Gujarat where the parties will give a feedback about the performance of the mediators. And then I requested my member secretary and other PDJs also, our chair persons and deputy secretaries to compile those data and then let me know who are the good mediators in that sense there are no complaints against them or there are good appreciations for them, etc. etc. So you are right. Constant evaluation is one aspect which needs to be done. But because your question is very pertinent. As of now, since there is no law, there is no codified law, there is no scope of any discipline reaction against a mediator if he diverges some confidential information. You can at best remove a person from that process. That is what it can happen. Or if you go against him as an advocate in the bar council, that is another person which can be done. But that is why always statutory support for certain things are needed. And that is where we are still in the limbo state and we hope that soon a comprehensive law will come where schemes will be notified, code of conduct will be notified, good training will also help them how to do the good mediation etc. etc. So as of now, discipline reaction, the occasions not many occasions have arisen because either the mediation fails there or if it succeeds and there are complaints, we can take some action on the administrative side. That is what it is. Codified law and as of now, we are also talking of developing separate mediation bars because the normal bar of advocates is not specialized bar. So specialized bar of the trained mediators is also a class apart which is needed where matured good mediators should be members and then they know their code of conduct, they have their code of conduct in place where action if necessary can also be taken. So this is all a joint effort which is going on in our country and these talks, these seminars, these conferences are meant to exactly evolve that kind of mindset so that the process takes a move forward and the very purpose of offloading the burden of the courts is achieved. Mr. Sain, JP Sain, who is a well-known face, I am asking him to unmute himself. Let's have his input also. Is he here in the... Please, please, most welcome sir. I didn't see you. Mr. Singh? He is logged in. Okay. Now I will ask Mr. Roshan Dal is also to give an input. Sir, I was... Unfortunately, I was not dressed for the occasion. Of course I am hearing the entire discourse. Oh, so nice of you sir. Your smile is enough JP. Sir, your turban is dressed enough to say everything in one go. Sorry sir, I was not able to hear you sir. Sir, the turban is dressed well enough for any occasion. JP, I said your smile is enough to... Please come on the screen and say few words about the whole thing sir. Sir, then give me two minutes, I will come back sir. Sir, we can ask Mr. Roshan Dal to give her input. Yes. What is her experience as a judge in Mumbai? She is very active. What should I do? My experience as a judge as well as a retired judge is good. But that is in those few matters where I am concerned. I am not concerned in most of them. I am missing only two things. Somebody said about training etc. MNLU is having a separate master's degree course in mediation of two years. Where I will be doing evaluative mediation with them and there are many other professors. It's completely different. It's all kind of bankers and insurers and government people and ombudsman and commercial business people etc. That's one thing. For the training, Mr. Dravid said that this 40 hours training is not enough. That's correct. We have now internationally conflict resolution. Mediation is only a part of that. I have done that training under a fellowship which I got from Rotary International. That was for three months. And that goes up to the country's mediation. Like India-Pakistan or India-Teshwin or whatever. Israel-Palestine. And mediation has solid problems of countries also. For example, Aceh and Indonesia. That is at that international level. The ICC has mediation. The International Court of Justice has mediation. So ours is kind of baby mediation. And even for that people are not willing. Therefore what I said is we must have a new crop. A young new crop with a different mindset from the beginning. And the old people who are experienced who have the time and the energy. I had some experience of that. I see Bangalore Chamber of Industry and Commerce has merged with the mediation centre in Bangalore. And they are doing very good work. I have seen one of their webinars where they are all very keen on going for mediation. The business people. I have little experience of the international taxation issues. Where this map procedure, mutually agreed procedure is nothing but mediation. The treaty provisions and all these things which give rise to international taxation disputes like Vodafone case etc. They are now trying through mediation. And various new treaties are incorporating this provision as a part of the treaties. So protocols we have called even amending old treaties to incorporate mediation as a necessary forum to sort out taxation disputes. So that things have been perceived taken to very high contours. And we in India also being a very thriving economy now. We are thinking to become world leaders of that also. So we have to provide this ADR system particularly in the mediation field in a very strong manner. And we have to prepare basically the good pool of people trained mediators to provide specialized services in the branches of law with which we deal. So it's a very serious topic kind of thing where somebody with the law in place and then training effort in place has to take lead. And all of us like soldiers have to contribute our minds to that. So thank you so much. J.P Singh is back. I'm J.P Singh. Can we see your screen sir? I would rather request you to say that whenever he joins our webinar he should know that we will always ask his suggestion. He should always be ready. He is now very ready. Thank you so much for this opportunity. So I feel like right now we should not look for the utopia. There is a requirement for actually spreading awareness. And therefore we need a pool of mediators who can go around India actually telling people what mediation is about. And so far as quality of mediators is concerned we should leave it on the market forces. See at the end of the day a good surgeon. I mean everybody who's done MBBS and MS is a surgeon. But a good surgeon stands out. So will a good mediator stand out. So therefore I mean we need not worry at this stage like you know we should have the highest standards so far as ethics are concerned etc. Because you know this is the time where we need the awareness to reach the taluka level. Today we are only looking at what you know mediation is succeeding Bangalore, Delhi, Chennai, I mean Mumbai. These are cosmopolitan towns. Ultimately you have to reach the real dedication as my lord said about the revenue matter. They start at the taluka level. So you have to reach there. And you know lawyer practicing in a taluka level may not have the highest of standards what we expect from a lawyer practicing in the high court. So therefore I mean let's not have those high standards right now pitch for those high standards. Let's have a pool of mediators yes. And ultimately the market forces will decide who will get what kind of work. But to my mind let's not make it restrictive even now. Okay but let's reach out to a pool. A present availability of the MCPC trained mediator sir is it enough or something more can be required or some unity trained people can be recognized for that purpose. So their training courses for advocates can be conducted at university levels and they can be recognized by MCPC. That's true sir. I mean like people like Mr. Niranjan Bhatt, Jawad, Leila Olappali, Sriram Panchu they are running you know private service providers and training institutes. And so you know people who actually undergo training under them. They are the people who really know what the mediation is about. Yes. And therefore these are people who can be used their services can be used by the MCPC and said look if you have undergone training under these people then you are fit to mediate. Yes. Because we need a very large number of medias you rightly said it has to be taken to Taluka level in order to really see the success and driving the force of this all this. May I say sir I would like to deadly high court model. Yes. Where they have a mediator along with him a new mediator is sitting just with him. Every mediation is attended by second generation mediator. Very right. Have experience of sitting with the mediator. Okay. And then they are prepared that deadly high court model is very good sir. Like new training just sit in the court with the senior judges and take the train. That's right. That can be done. I think one thing if I may add what I think what JP said is a very valid point because we have private organizations whether it is camp or buyback or maathiam or ADR or the international who are turning out quality trade who are giving really quality training for mediators. And it is actually an injustice to them to keep them out of the court annexed trade mediation also because they are the quality of trading that they undergo the kind of exposure that they get is something really incredible. So because people from abroad come they conduct these training programs and a lot of money is spent on this lot of time is spent on this. So there should be some recognition given to those kind of trainings I feel in order to increase the pool of media rather than NCTC insisting that only their trainers should train the mediators and only then they will be qualified only under their program. So maybe they can have some kind of an evaluation. And if the mediators get through that, then they should consider in paneling those media. Vikas you can even call somebody from the audience if they raise hands and want to give their comment. But only three aspects I will share since I have received two WhatsApps. One is that in which types of fields actually there is a statutory backing of a mediation like the same commercial courts act. Anybody out of you can tell a large number of people would like to know where there is a statutory provision that you have to have a pre litigation mediation. What is the way forward. And number two one has suggested what Mr. Bhaktan said that there should be a under the tutelage of a senior mediator one should learn how to 40 hours training is enough. But yes, you have to have a under the tutelage you will have a live demonstration because once you jump into the field. It's always easy watching a match in the stadium is different than what you are playing in the stadium. So what is your take on that? I think commercial courts act amendments has been a wonderful thing. Firstly by lowering the benchmark from 1 crore to three legs, which is now the thing. And with that the flow of litigation has been transferred from normal civil courts to the commercial courts. For which separate dedicated courts have been created of course deputing the senior civil judges from the normal stream to there. And just brought a floodgate of the litigation from this stream to this system. Now for new cases of course section 12 capital A with the environment provides that you have to necessarily try the mediation before you institute the suit in the commercial court with the three legs plus limit. Now there as I earlier pointed out section 12 a mandate set with the proviso that if the interim relief is needed mediator will not be able to do anything you can approach the court. My view on that is that that should have been automatically stay on that yes, but now mediation for three months have to be tried in commercial disputes by that amendment is a good step. And it goes to the normal mediation process that we have a test with the legal service of the TN mediation centers media centers are there in all the states. So they are happening as of now, unfortunately for last two years the corona has reduced all working levels in all fields. So data is not as of now fully readily available with us to tell you the success story part of it. But yes, as a law amendment, it's a good step and commercial disputes. I know for sure. If they are tried out and properly settled in the mediation leaves much burden of the court settled at that first. So it's very good that this amendment has come. And I hope the present pool of the mediators available with us at the taluka level, the state level and the state level also will be able to handle this inflow of the mediation cases with the reduced limits also because even the existing cases can be referred by the concerned commercial code to the mediation and pre-education is always mandated also with the proviso where intramelief is needed. So even with the intramelief granted or refused, you can come back to the mediation stream and discuss disputes and then try your luck there. So it's a welcome amendment and other laws like consumer disputes and company law provisions have been amended. Even thought celebrities can be settled in the mediation process. So it's all a good welcome steps which are taking towards that. And commercial though it was done to satisfy the international convention obligations of our country to introduce this amendment and bring down the benchmark from 1 crore to 3 next. And let us hope that next year when we are competitively on a full stream kind of working 2022, we'll be able to produce good results of the commercial dispute resolutions through the mediation process. So before we are parting one question which has come on the whatsapp is a motor accident claims where we are thinking like a lot of issues are now quite settled with cities judgment and all judgments where they are now modules, what is the picture then all? If we start incorporating under the even under the motor accident. No, in motor accident as you know, just a secret is 2019 dead man Krishna Motti's. They introduced the concept of mama authority which was this motor accidents mediation authority. And cells were created in all the state. For settlement of the motor accident claims before litigation. So that that institution has also been created by the judgment awaiting the final mediation law on this. And you know motor vehicles cases are very popularly and very cooperatively settled in Loka Dallas also in the mediation also because the parties on both sides want to have the urge and desire to settle. And that is the first requirement of a mediation process to success. If you enter in the mediation field with the willingness, it settles. If you enter into the field on a mediation room with a desire not to settle, that's very difficult for the mediator also. So motor accidents is another very, very big area where things can be settled and they are settling and with the mama authority now created by the set judgment of justice secret last year. I think the things will take a very positive step for good understanding. So once you are done with the judgment, sir, could you just elaborate because there are a lot of people watching us live on the Facebook and YouTube. What is the way forward in that? What is actually the way forward? Now the first thing in this they can do is to approach the district legal service authorities where the cells have been created for settlement of dispute like you lodge an FIR in the police station. You can at the same time lodge a claim with the legal service of the team. And they will try to call all the parties on the table whose vehicle has caused the accident, who is injured, who is deceased or is legal representative, etc. All consent members can assemble there with the evidence collected through the police authorities, etc. Even an immediate settlement of dispute can be done. No need to file section 166 claim at all. Even section 164, if you decide the claim and get your money there, who is going to the court. So the framework is in place. Now again, perhaps the lack of awareness is not there enough to take these cases at the very first sense when one goes to police station. One can also go to district legal service authority and the consent mama sale, mediation motor accident, mediation authority. That has been created and says that we created all the district legal service authorities where the concerned judge or district legal service authority can call the parties, settle the dispute, draw the settlement and matter becomes final. So this is a great way out in at least in motor vehicle cases where a use, I mean, urge is there to receive the compensation immediately. Now you see the matters being settled on the roads. People don't take away the dead bodies unless the compensation is paid by the government. So situation has gone down to that level. So if that awareness is created that here is a legal way to immediate settlement to get your compensation as quickly as possible within a week or 10 days, things like that. When the iron is hot, strike it then. Then I think it is a matter of awareness. The concerned lawyers who deal with the motor vehicle cases to take them to resort them to this system is has to be there. So that is all a matter of you can take the horse to the water. Yes, because I think there are two hands up, two people have their hands up. They are without guns also, their hands up. Please ask the question. They want to file the question. Most welcome. What was the function and another one? Dr. Srikanth Parthasad. Anybody on this screen who wants to ask something, he can be unmuted. He can be directly in the touch. Member Secretary Gujarat also has the hand. Mr. Mulya, Mr. Srikanth Parthasad, you are unmuted. Please ask a question. Namaskar, sir. Namaskar. It was a very, very good session to hear from, I mean, especially coming from the Gujarat High Court, which is live streaming the proceeding itself. That is a, you know, that is one of the questions, one of the chat, chat boxes, which said. I remember that it is very, very effective person. He's a very good district judge. Mr. Mulya is very effective. Must have done that. Yes. Yes. What do you say? What is your question, sir? Yes. So, my, let me keep it very brief. The question is, you know, as a mediator as well as an arbitrator, the perception of mediation is that it is not at any point, anybody can walk away from that mediation discussion. Is one of the perceptions that we are finding in, you know, in commercial mediation, at least. So how do we change that perception? Unlike arbitration where you can't walk away. Exactly. Sir, judicial meaning, how can we bring in private mediation is a question. Since no compulsion is there, it is walking away, of course, has to be kept easy all the only. It's only your own willingness which will serve the cause, not the, as I said, if you come with the heart not to settle, then it can never succeed. If you come with a mindset that it can be settled possibly, then you are given, you give a fair trial or fair chance to that process. So you are right that perception can be there that to why mediation is a very easy thing to walk away, say thank you very much and go away, no problems with that also. But then he has to be shown the mirror that look here if you go to litigation channel, here's the delays and delays and delays. So it is better for you to give a fair chance to this. I have a second question on that which Mr. Javad raised. How do we make the transparency in the cost of mediation because that is one of the most important things that we are not talking about, especially when it comes to private mediation and when you're having world-class mediation, it comes with a cost. The voice is breaking a bit. But you are right, the cost of mediation or the professional charges or the fees which the parties should be requested to pay as of now has no statutory backing. These private mediation have taken off, of course, with the assumption that they charge their professional fees for providing the skills. Of course, Mr. Javad, would you have a comment on that particular point, especially with regard to cost, especially considering that we are talking about international mediation and international processes. How is it that we are going to, how is it that parties should feel relevant after a mediation process that yes, it made a difference. A settlement agreement is just one part of it, but having the feeling that I was not cheated in the process is also one of the perceptions to be managed, is what I feel. No, that is something which will be very difficult to answer in our culture, Dr. Sridhar, because if you go abroad, if you go to the other countries like the US or UK, media does charge a reasonable fee for their services and regardless of whether the settlement is reached or not. And parties feel that they are rightfully entitled to because the time is given a lot of money. But here in India, even as lawyers, we find it very difficult to, you know, clients feel, when it comes to the payment of fees, there's a lot of problems that we face. When we charge fees to the clients, very established senior lawyers who can charge by the hour or per appearance, they charge so much. But for younger lawyers, it's very difficult to fix the fee because here there's no, that is where I feel that we need a lot of cultural changes that we need to make in the way we think. Because we feel, like I had this when I was, when I started my practice, a client came to me for consultation. I spent about two hours with the client and I advised him on what is the cost of action. And when he was about to leave, I said, my fee will be so much.   It's something tangible that you get. Whereas the value of an intellectual input that you get, it's intangible. So you don't really know how to value that. So where mediation is concerned, I think we need to, you know, we still haven't evolved those parameters where we can fix the fee. So in private mediation, wherever I'm doing private mediation, I still struggle to fix the fee and tell the clients that this is the fee that will be paid. So that still is a challenge. So I think probably maybe there is some statutory framework or something like how we have, you know, the highest fee rules are there in the high courts. So something similar to that can be done. My experience is that when a client comes for private mediation, two people, and they are charged and they pay the fees, they are more inclined to get the result. They want to worth of their money. But if there is a free mediation, they are not serious. Free mediation, they come just for fun of it. And then since they have not paid any money, they don't care whether they're successful into their mediation or not. Therefore, I think there should be some payment made by them, their willingness to make the payment. And unless we keep some payment, but that will happen only after mediation becomes popular. And I think the courts can start doing that. So maybe the courts can tell the client parties whom they refer to mediation and the court and its programs that they should pay. The court can fix the fee and tell the clients that they should pay this fee upfront and then go ahead with the mediation. Probably what you say might come in useful there. Since they have a commitment. I'll narrate our experience in 2003. We started first mediation center run by lawyers exclusively. People are coming there, we had a nice office and everything. When the court annex mediation came, because we were charging money and people were paying money and we're getting the result. Chief Justice B.N. Kripal inaugurated that lawyers mediation center. But since court annex mediation came, they were getting free mediation. And therefore they stopped our lawyers mediation center because I almost destroyed when free court annex mediation came. And we all started joining as mediators without charging anything. And unless you get some money, your commitment or your senior sincerity will be less. Therefore, payment, which is done by Delhi High Court Mediation Center. They started with 10,000 rupees per mediation. Now they've increased. Therefore there the result is good because people pay sizable amount and they want to get the result for that. So paying hardly a thousand rupees, even lawyers are not ready to come. So these are all connected problems, which will be required to be settled. But I do find one thing you and I should have experienced that when they come to us, they sit with us. Then when they are told that your self determination is very important.  When you want to get a job, in terms of the job you are negotiating. In India even marriage is negotiated. So why can't dispute be negotiated? Do you want Ulzan or do you want Surjan in India? Do you want battle or you want to settle? So then people understand that they cooperate. Gradually when they are in mediation, they handshake and they are very happy to have found their result. And they feel that they themselves have decided. So another question. We are touching around to us. I think we have taken a lot of before I request you to formally hold the vote of thanks along with the to maintain social distancing and all you know that how we all know that how you have suffered during this COVID. From you, we would like to think of former vote of thanks and coupled with how important is to maintain social distancing and vaccination and etc. Since we were from Chandigarh, I would like to have a special thanks to Monica Jolota, Vikran Sharma, Mr. Sylvia, Divya, and Saloni who have joined us. It's only that they say that one who is closer to your place is always closer to your heart where you intend to believe that what you had put forward a step. They are also joining you and they're encouraging. Thank you. Thank you. First of all, thank you for organizing this webinar and enabling me to share the platform with my idol Mr. Niranjan Bhatt and Mr. Justice Puneet Pahari. And not only that, I also had the privilege of sharing the platform now with my very good friend Prashant and Sashila ma'am, who's my guru who actually taught me discipline because I was very disciplined. My time management was completely, you know, alright. So she was one person who really taught me time management for which I'm very grateful to her. So it's a real privilege to be here with her and Justice Roshan Dalvi for all the insights that she has given us. And it's always a pleasure to listen to her. JP Singh and so many others. I can't name everybody who is here. So thank you very much and we are going through some very difficult times. All of us have lost somebody or the other who's very close to us, our loved ones, and there have been a lot of tragedies happening all around us. But at the same time, we have found within us the resilience to stand up to the situation and to face it with a lot of courage and grit. That is the hallmark of our culture. And we have been able to come and I'm sure that we will come out of it with our heads held high, not withstanding the losses that we are going to be suffering. So it's very important that we respect the science that is helping us to overcome this. So it's very important that we get vaccinated, we observe the social distancing, we mask ourselves. We adhere to the lockdown regulations and everything. And thank you once again, special thanks to Mr. Sriniv Kothari and Mr. Varanjan Bhatt. I would also like to thank Justice Kothari sir, because the initiative which you have taken sir. And this is very interesting discussion today because thank you so much also. And I remember Justice Roshan's presentation some years back when she got us involved in her presentation when she said related mediation with sports, something like that. Some PowerPoint presentations were given how giving analogy of sports and then you took us to mediation that I distinctly remember and I enjoyed your presentation then also. And always whenever I meet you, I enjoy meeting you. Sir, thank you very much sir for your effort, for your details which you presented today and inspired us all to join with you in whatever you do sir, we commit ourselves.  Thank you. I could join from other device and I must thank Mr. Vikas, my co-panelist Mr. Bhatt and Mr. Javad, Madam Shushila, Prashant Chandra, Mr. JP Singh, all my judicial officers from the state of Gujarat, Leneh Durgas, my research assistant, who is now a state also civil judge. And thank you all for joining this interesting debate and discussion which is the ongoing process. We all learn every day and I hope all of us are going with a richer experience and more and more desire to take this mediation moment in a march forward. So thank you very much Madam Prashant Chandra, we also thank you. Thank you Vikas, good luck. Thank you.  Thank you for joining us and this gives us the right impetus to keep on working for the betterment of the better tomorrow. Testing times don't last, but strong people do last. They say that it's the brave men who can always wither away all the bad things. This time too shall pass. Everyone stay safe, stay blessed and thank you to all those participants and thank you. Special thanks to Mr. Sain, Sushila Vam, just Russian Dalvi, Mr. Prashant who have logged in and they say that they're joining us later putting more tasty for everyone for a food of thought for today. Thank you everyone. Thank you.