- (1.) In our previous order dated 26th February, 2019 we have recorded that the dispute raised in the present cases (i.e. appeals/special leave petitions/writ petitions) should be attempted to be resolved by mediation to be held during the period of eight weeks that we had allowed to the parties to take steps to make the cases ready for hearing. The aforesaid part of the order dated 26th February, 2019 is extracted below: "We have suggested to the parties that during the interregnum a Court appointed and Court monitored mediation with utmost confidentiality could be initiated to bring a permanent solution to the issues raised in the cases. This, we have done keeping in mind that the period of eight weeks that we have allowed to the parties to go through the translations of the oral and documentary evidence could be effectively utilized to try and resolve the issues in the manner indicated above. In doing so, we have also kept in mind the mandate of Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908."
(2.) We have heard the learned counsels for the parties on the issue as to whether the dispute between the parties should be referred to mediation by invoking Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (hereinafter referred to as "CPC")
(3.) We have considered the nature of the dispute arising. Notwithstanding the lack of consensus between the parties in the matter we are of the view that an attempt should be made to settle the dispute by mediation.;