TEAM CODE: 14

PART -II
ROLE PLAY

PARTIES INVOLVED:

1. Mrs K.S Abhirami – The Complainant

2. M/S Hyundai Motors – Respondent 1
3. M/S Singular Hyundai – Respondent 2

MEDIATOR: Adv. Sangeeth Mohan

 LIST OF CONTENTS

⮚ GENERAL INTRODUCTION ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

(ADR)

⮚ THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

⮚ FACTS OF THE CASE
⮚ FACTS IN ISSUE
⮚ SCRIPT OF THE ROLE PLAY

♦ INTRODUCTORY SESSION
♦ PRESENTING SESSION
♦ CAUCUS SESSION
♦ CONSENSUS SESSION
♦ SETTLEMENT /CONCLUSION SESSION

⮚ SETTLEMENT DEED

⮚ DECISIONS
⮚ STUDENT DETAILS
⮚ APPENDIX
 ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a term used to describe several

different modes of resolving legal disputes. It is experienced by the business
world as well as common men that it is impracticable for many individuals to
file law suits and get timely justice. The Courts are backlogged with dockets
resulting in delay of year or more for the parties to have their cases heard and
decided. To solve this problem of delayed justice ADR Mechanism has been
developed in response thereof. Alternative dispute redressal method is being
increasingly acknowledged in field of law and commercial sectors both at
National and International levels.

Its diverse methods can helps the parties to resolve their disputes at their own
terms cheaply and expeditiously. Alternative dispute redressal techniques are in
addition to the Courts in character. Alternative dispute redressal techniques can
be used in almost all contentious matters, which are capable of being resolved,
under law, by agreement between the parties.

Alternative dispute redressal techniques can be employed in several categories

of disputes, especially civil, commercial, industrial and family disputes. Form
the study of the different alternative dispute redressal techniques in the
proceedings chapters it is found that, alternative dispute redressal methods
offers the best solution in respect of commercial disputes where the economic
growth of the Country rests. The goal of Alternative dispute redressal is
enshrined in the Indian Constitution's preamble itself, which enjoins the state:
"to secure to all the citizens of India, justice-social, economic and political
liberty, equality and fraternity". The Law Commission of India has maintained
that, the reason judicial delay is not a lack of clear procedural laws, but rather
the imperfect execution, or even utter non observance, thereof.
The Law Commission of India in its 14th Report categorically stated that, the
delay results not from the procedure laid down by the legislations but by reason
of the non-observance of many of its important provisions particularly those
intended to expedite the disposal of proceedings. Given the huge number of
pending cases, the governance and administrative control over judicial
institutions through manual processes has become extremely difficult.

The Supreme Court made it clear that this stage of affair must be addressed: 'An
independent and efficient judicial system in one of the basic structures of our
constitution... It is our Constitutional obligation to ensure that the backlog of
cases is declared and efforts are made to increase the disposal of cases . "Wide
range of process are defined as alternative dispute redressal process often,
dispute resolution process that are alternative to the adjudication through Court
proceedings are referred to as alternative dispute resolution methods. These
methods usually involve a third party referred to as neutral, a skilled helper who
either assists the parties in a dispute or conflict to reach at a decision by
agreement or facilitates in arriving at a solution to the problem between the
party to the dispute. The alternative disputes resolution mechanism by the very
methodology used, it can preserve and enhance personal and business
relationships that might otherwise be damages by the adversarial process. It is
also flexible because it allows the contestants to choose procedures, which fir
the nature of the dispute and the business context in which it occurs. The term
"Alternative Disputes Resolution" takes in its fold, various modes of settlement
including, Lok Adalat, arbitration, conciliation and Mediation.
This technique of Alternative Disputes Resolution has been used by many
countries for effective disputes resolution. The most common types of
Alternative Disputes Resolution is Mediation. In, fact mediation had been
described by some as the most Appropriate Dispute Resolution method.
Mediation as a tool for dispute resolution is not a new concept. To put it in
simple terms, mediation is an amicable settlement of disputes with the
involvement of a neutral third party who acts as a facilitator and is called a
'Mediator". ADR is usually less formal, less expensive and less time consuming
then regular trial. ADR can also give people more opportunity to determine
when and how their dispute will be resolved.
 CONCEPTS OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

⮚ ARBITRATION:

Arbitration, a form of alternative dispute resolution, is a technique for the

resolution of disputes outside the courts, where the parties to a dispute refer it to
one or more persons – arbitrators, by whose decision they agree to be bound. It
is a resolution technique in which a third party reviews the evidence in the case
and imposes a decision that is legally binding for both sides and enforceable.
There are limited rights of review and appeal of Arbitration awards. Arbitration
is not the same as judicial proceedings and Mediation. Arbitration can be either
voluntary or mandatory. Of course, mandatory Arbitration can only come from
a statute or from a contract that is voluntarily entered into, where the parties
agree to hold all existing or future disputes to arbitration, without necessarily
knowing, specifically, what dispute will ever occur.

⮚ CONCILIATION:

Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution process whereby the parties to a

dispute use a Mediator, who meets with the parties separately in order to resolve
their differences. They do this by lowering tensions, improving
communications, interpreting issues, providing technical assistance, exploring
potential solutions and bring about a negotiated settlement. It differs from
Arbitration in that. Conciliation is a voluntary proceeding, where the parties
involved are free to agree and attempt to resolve their dispute by conciliation.
The process is flexible, allowing parties to define the time, structure and content
of the conciliation proceedings. These proceedings are rarely public. They are
interest-based, as the Mediator will when proposing a settlement, not only take
into account the parties' legal positions, but also their; commercial, financial and
/or personal interests. The terms conciliation and mediation are interchangeable
in the Indian context. Conciliation is a voluntary process whereby the Mediator,
a trained and qualified neutral, facilitates negotiations between disputing parties
and assists them in understanding their conflicts at issue and their interests in
order to arrive at a mutually acceptable agreement. Conciliation involves
discussions among the parties and the Mediator with an aim to explore
sustainable and equitable resolutions by targeting the existent issues involved in
the dispute and creating options for a settlement that are acceptable to all
parties. The Mediator does not decide for the parties, but strives to support them
in generating options in order to find a solution that is compatible to both
parties. The process is risk free and not binding on the parties till they arrive at
and sign the agreement. Once a solution is reached between the disputing parties
before a Mediator, the agreement had the effect of an arbitration award and is
legally tenable in any court in the country.

⮚ MEDIATION:

Mediation settlement is a voluntary and informal process of resolution of

disputes. It is a simple, voluntary, party centered and structured negotiation
process, where a neutral third party assists the parties in amicably resolving
their disputes by using specified communication and negotiation techniques.
Mediation is a process where it is controlled by the parties themselves. The
mediator only acts as a facilitator in helping the parties to reach a negotiated
settlement of their dispute. The mediator makes no decisions and does not
impose his view of what a fair settlement should be. In the mediation process,
each side meets with an experienced neutral mediator. The session begins with
each side describing the problem and the resolution they desire – from their
point of view. Once each sides’ respective positions are aired, the mediator then
separates them into private rooms, beginning a process of “Caucus Meeting”
 and thereafter “joint meetings with the parties”. The end product is the
agreement of both the side. In the mediation process, each side meets with an
experienced neutral mediator. The session begins with each side describing the
problem and the resolution they desire – from their point of view. Once each
sides’ respective positions are aired, the mediator then separates them into
private rooms, beginning a process of “Caucus Meeting” and thereafter “joint
meetings with the parties”. The end product is the agreement of both the sides.
The mediator has no power to dictate his decision over the party. There is a win
– win situation in the mediation

⮚ NEGOTIATION:

Negotiation can be defined as a bilateral or multilateral process in which parties

who differ over a particular issue attempt to reach agreement or compromise
over that issue through communication . Negotiation is about communication,
which entails dialogue, deliberation and round table conference with the aim of
reaching an agreement or settlement over a determined subject or object.
Negotiation is a voluntary ADR process. There is no third party to facilitate the
resolution process or impose a sentence. It is an act of goodwill through back
and-forth communication designed to reach an agreement between two or more
parties with some interests that are shared and others that may conflict or simply
be different..

⮚ LOK ADALAT

A Lok Adalat, which translates to a "People's Court", is a means of settling a

dispute by a process conducted by a State Authority. It is regulated by the Legal
Service Authorities Act, 1987. The advantage of a Lok Adalat is that no court
fees have to be paid and there are no strict procedural requirements that have to
be followed. This makes proceedings cost effective and allows for a quick
settlement of the dispute at hand. The proceedings are usually presided over by
retired judges or lawyer who will give their decision in the matter. The object of
a Lok Adalat is to reach a settlement between the parties based on a
compromise. No appeal shall lie to any court of law against such a settlement.
 THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION

In the case selected, Mediation is the best option that the parties can choose to
solve their dispute. We opt for Mediation as the suitable mechanism for resolving
the disputes arising from the context. Mediation is an Alternative Dispute resolution
where a third neutral party aims to assist two or more disputants in reaching
agreement. It is an easy and uncomplicated party centered negotiation process
where third party acts as a mediator to resolve dispute amicably by using
appropriate communication and negotiation techniques. This process is totally
controlled by the parties. Mediator’s work is just to facilitate the parties to reach
settlement of their dispute. Mediator doesn’t impose his views make no decision
about what a fair settlement should be.

The process of mediation works in various stages. These are:

1. Opening statement

2. Joint session

3. Separate session and,

4. Closing

At the commencement of mediation process, the mediator shall ensure the parties
and them counsels should be present. Initially in the opening statement he furnishes
all the information about his appointment and declares he does not have any
connection with either of parties and has no interest in the dispute. In the joint
session, he gathers all the information, understand the fact and issues about the
dispute by inviting both the parties to present their case and put forward their
perspective without any interruption. In this session, mediator tries to encourage and
promote communication and manage interruption and outbursts by the parties.

Next is separate session, where he tries to understand the dispute at a deeper level,

gathers specific information by taking both the parties in confidence separately.

Mediator asks frequent questions on facts and discusses strengths and weaknesses to

the parties of their respective cases. After hearing both the sides, mediator starts
formulating issues for resolution and creating options for settlement.

It is a procedure in which the parties discuss their disputes with the assistance of a
trained impartial third person(s) who assists them in reaching a settlement. It may
be an informal meeting among the parties or a scheduled settlement conference. The
dispute may either be pending in a court or potentially a dispute which may be filed
in court. Cases suitable for mediation are disputes in commercial transactions,
personal injury, construction, workers compensation, labor or community relations,
divorce, domestic relations, employment or any other matters which do not involve
complex procedural or evidentiary issues. Attendance at the mediation conference is
voluntary by the parties, except were governed by statute or contract clause.

The mediator is a person with patience, persistence and common sense. She/he has
an arsenal of negotiation techniques, human dynamics skills and powers of effective
listening, articulation and restatement. The mediator is a facilitator who has no
power to render a resolution to the conflict. The parties will fashion the solution as
the mediator moves through the process. In many jurisdictions the mediator is an
attorney but cannot give legal advice while in the role of a mediator. However, the
mediator's subject area expertise may be beneficial to the parties in wording and
framing the mediated agreement or in circumstances where the parties are open to
neutral case evaluation.
 PROBLEM

The Complainant K. S Abhirami is an Advocate, having permanent residence at

Trivandrum, but presently practising outside Trivandrum District. The
Complainant purchased a new Hyundai Creta car following their advertisements
depicting priority to safety, as safety in driving and comfort was her top priorities
in mind for purchasing a car. While discussing with the dealer Singular Hyundai
on various models and facilities available- the dealer had attracted the
Complainant to a higher grade model of Creta by name and style SX55. The same
had more technical features including higher safety features with Alloy wheels of
larger tyre size. They also informed the Complainant that Alloy wheels as
compared to ordinary steel wheels are the best in safety, performance, looks and
durability. She made an informed choice and purchased the higher grade variant
of Hyundai Creta namelySX55 as suggested by the dealer. Later the
Complainant found that the spare wheel (stepney) provided was one totally
different and had no resemblance to that of the other wheels. The wheel provided
is of lower circumference and size as compared to the main 4 four wheels. The
dealer had not disclosed the same. If it had been informed before the purchase of
the car, the Complainant might have opted another model car of lesser value. The
Complainant fears that in an emergency, using this stepney will damage the car
and put both her and the car at risk. The safety of the car- which is of paramount
importance to the Complainant would then be compromised. The Complainant is
asking for compensation against unfair trade practice.
 FACTS IN ISSUE

1. Whether K.S Abhirami is entitled to compensation?

2. Whether the Respondent is liable to compensate the complainant on account
of non-fulfillment of requirement specified?
 ROLE PLAY SCRIPT

Mediator: Adv. Sangeeth Mohan

PARTIES:
1. Mrs. K.S Abhirami -Aggrieved Party [AP1]
2. Hyundai Motors -Defending Party [DP1]
3. Singular Hyundai -Defending Party [DP2]

INTRODUCTORY SESSION
(Two Scenes)
SCENE I

[All Negotiators and the Mediator join at the mediation room and exchange greetings
and pleasantries within the group. The Mediator requests all attendees to be seated; he
formally greets all of them.]
(Mediator kicks off the meeting with a formal introduction of herself detailing her
credentials. she then for the purpose of records requests each member to formally
introduce themselves).

Mediator: Good Morning All. I am Sangeeth Mohan, a practicing lawyer and the
Mediator for this case. I have been practicing as a Mediator for the last 6 years. As
your Mediator I am here to resolve the disputes between both the parties and to reach
at an amicable settlement for the same. You can feel free to address your respective
grievances and issues based on your reasonable interest. As a Mediator I promise to
act in an independent, confidential, and impartial manner and also will be binding by
the principles of objectivity, fairness and justice while reaching a proper settlement
for resolving the disputes between you. First of all, I should clarify that I have no
connection with this case. I will do everything in my power to assure that the process
remains confidential. Our goal here is to reach an agreement. As we had already
reached a a consensus regarding the fees of this mediation, we shall move on to the
proceedings. So before we begin to discuss and resolve the issue at hand, both of you
can introduce yourself and your respective involvement and interest in the matter.

SCENE II

[The participants start to introduce themselves, starting with Mrs. Abhirami K S.]

Petitioner: Good Morning. I am Abhirami K S, and I’m deeply aggrieved by their

cheating. [Mrs Abhirami K S seems to be angry and Mr. Abraham has next turn.]

Respondent: I am the advocate representing both the respondents.. [He

acknowledges.]

PRESENTING SESSION
(Five scenes)
SCENE III

Mediator: Well, as both of you have introduced yourself let’s move to the issue at
hand. But before that there are certain things that you have to keep in mind during the
proceedings. As you already know I will be leading to the sessions. You have to
understand that both will be getting their respective chances to present your scenarios
such that refrain from all possible interferences. Both of you have to keep the
decorum and let's conduct this session civilly and peacefully.
[Mr. Abraham getting ready for her oral submissions]

Petitioner: I'm an advocate, residing in Trivandrum, and practising in various courts

through out Kerala. Based on an advertisement, I approached the respondent for
buying a creta. They convinced me to to buy a top end model of the same since it
comes with more safety features. The same had more technical features including
higher safety features with Alloy wheels of larger tyre size. They also informed me
that Alloy wheels as compared to ordinary steel wheels are the best in safety,
performance, looks and durability. She made an informed choice and purchased the
higher grade variant of Hyundai Creta namelySX55 as suggested by the dealer. Later
the Complainant found that the spare wheel (stepney) provided was one totally
different and had no resemblance to that of the other wheels. The wheel provided is of
lower circumference and size as compared to the main 4 four wheels. The dealer had
not disclosed the same. If it had been informed before the purchase of the car, the
Complainant might have opted another model car of lesser value. The Complainant
fears that in an emergency, using this stepney will damage the car and put both her and
the car at risk. The safety of the car, which is of paramount importance to the
Complainant would then be compromised. The Complainant is asking for
compensation against unfair trade practice.

Respondent: Being the manufacturer of the car, we acknowledge the fact that the
size of the spare wheel is small when compared to the other wheels. But that doesn’t
justify the petitioners claims.

[Mrs.Abhirami K S in her desperate to make her move to speak]

Petitioner: The respondents are accepting that they had provided spare tyre of small
size and now claiming that the arguments raised by me are false. This clearly shows
their attitude. Are they doing this fearing that I would expose their shenanigans?
Respondent: The petitioner is making baseless claims. We are interested in
continuing in this mediation, if and only if the petitioners are maintaining civility. We
are ready to hear anything said by her, but we cannot tolerate baseless accusations
raised against our company.

[Pointing both the parties and communicates]

Mediator: Alright. What we need here is a reasonable settlement protecting the

interest of both of you.

[Mrs. Abhirami K S showing some inconvenient gestures and attitude.]

Petitioner: I can only reach a settlement where I can get a monetary compensation of
rupees five lakhs from these people who cheated me.

Respondent: To be honest, I cannot still understand why she is claiming

compensation? We had never said that we would be giving a spare tyre of the same
size.

[Mrs.Abhirami K S becomes a little enraged.]

Petitioner: But that is a legitimate expectation.

Respondent: Getting a spare tyre that would serve the purpose can be a legitimate
expectation. How can this be a legitimate expectation? Moreover we are selling this
vehicle after getting all the clearances from the government. So there is nothing
illegitimate.
 SCENE-IV

Petitioner: You never told me about the fact that stepney wheel is of lesser
circumference when I approached you to buy your car.

[Respondent advocate shakes his head and shows her complete disagreement with
Mrs.Abhirami K S and strives forward with her arguments.]

Respondent: We may not have said that. But it is the obligation of the buyer to
enquire about the specifications. As a lawyer, the respondent is well aware of this
legal principle, i.e Caveat Emptor

Petitioner: I know what Caveat Emptor means. Its a rule stating that the buyer has to
be beware. But this rule has got certain exceptions. as a lawyer you should be also
aware about it. When there is a specification, which in the normal course, the buyer is
unable to know; then the seller has to disclose it, if he is having knowledge about it.

Respondent: As a lawyer I’m well aware of this exception. But her claims are
wrong. I can prove it with evidence, if you allow me.

Mediator: Sure, Please proceed.

SCENE-V

Respondent: The petitioner said that she wasn't specifically informed about the
specification. That's wrong. All those information are available in the public domain.
Our website specifically shows that. Here is a printout of the same.
 (Respondent handovers a copy of the same to both the people)

It is very much evident from this that these informations can be easily accessed from
our website. So petitioners claim does not have any backing and hence is baseless.

Petitioner: Okay i agree. But when I visited their showroom, their sales person
approached me and said several features of the tyre. But he never mentioned about
this. Which means they are willfully concealing this.

Respondent: As said earlier, she is raising baseless arguments.

Petitioner: No I’m explaining by difficulties. I’m only ready to for a settlement if

they are ready to pay the compensation.

Mediator:So, are neither of you willing to take a step back on your demands?

Petitioner: I am not keen on a filing litigation but you have to admit that my claims
are legitimate and I deserve compensation

Mediator: So you are unwilling to reduce your demand of Rupees 5 Lakhs.

Petitioner: I would like to request a CAUCUS session.

Mediator: Ok. Mr.Abraham, can you please wait outside?

Respondent: Ok I will be outside.

(Respondent leaves the room)

 SCENE- VI

Mediator: Now you can tell me whatever you want and this will not reach the ears of
the other party.
Petitioner: Thank you. Actually it relates to my medical condition and I did not want
Mr. Abraham to know about it.

Mediator: Oh, I see. And Mrs Abhirami, now you can tell me right?

Petitioner: The fact is that I have episodes of panic attack and when I found out that
the stepney tyre was of smaller size I was on my way back from work at night. The
tyre of my car got punctured and I was going to replace it.

Mediator: Oh! And did you have a panic attack?

Petitioner: Exactly, imagine having a panic attack in the middle of the night in a dark
and lonely road. How dangerous it was!!! This is also why I am so angry and wants to
get compensation.

Mediator: Yes, I see your point. So you will not take a step back even if it leads to
litigation?

Petitioner: I really don’t want to get tied up with legal proceedings but the fact is that
they are still not acknowledging their faults and are still unwilling to even replace the
stepney wheel.

Mediator: Indeed they are denying any liability. But if you really do not want to be in
a law suit you should suggest your least demands and try to reach a settlement. Do you
have anything else to say in this CAUCUS session Mrs. Abhirami?

Petitioner: No

(CAUCUS session ends)

SCENE-VII

(Respondent re-enters the room)

[Mediator suddenly felt that there is a slight possibility resolving the conflict]

Mediator: I have heard both sides and from what I understand both of you wish to
settle this dispute without any hassles. So Mrs. Abhirami let’s start with you. Now
that you have said everything you wish to say and have heard the responses of the
respondents, how would you like to solve the issues?

[Mrs Abhirami K S became speechless for a moment as she starts thinking.]

Petitioner: Alright I will take a step back. I will settle with them replacing the
Stepney wheel with one of alloy that is similar size to the other tyres.

Mediator: Wonderful! Now that Mrs. Abhirami has taken a step back, what do you
have to say to that, Mr.Abraham?

Respondent: But we haven’t done any wrong so why should we replace her tyre?

Petitioner: This is exactly what I have been telling. They are still unapologetic. Fine! I
haven’t been meaning to tell you but I had a panic attack because of your stupid tyre.
Respondent: What!

Mediator: Both of you please calm down. Please take a deep breath and settle your
minds.I know there are some mistakes from the part of both of you but we have an
option to resolve this conflict now and let us try to achieve that.

CONSENSUS SESSION
(Two Scenes)
SCENE VIII

Mediator: See OUR GOAL is a resolution that would be arrived at only by building
consensus. One thing I noticed is that both of you really want to resolve this conflict
without approaching the court. So can’t you make some adjustments in the matter.

Respondent: I am really sorry about your incident. I did not know about it.

Mediator: Mrs. Abhirami, they have apologised for what happened to you. So do
you still stand by your offer to settle this matter with a replaced stepney tyre of same
specifications as the main ones?

Petitioner: Yes. I will end this matter if thay do that.

Mediator: And Mr.Abraham, how about you? Are you willing to accept her claim?

Respondent: I am once again sorry for what happened. Alright we will also accept
Mrs Abhirami’s claim and replace the stepney.

SCENE IX

Mediator: Mrs. Abhirami, please try to find everything about a product you are
about to buy and not wait for the sellers to tell you everything.
Petitioner: Okay it’s just I thought they would be more candid.

Mediator: Also, Mr. Abraham, please be more upfront about any features of the
products which deviate from common expectation.

Respondent: We have always been upfront about our features but we will also take
additional care to bring such things to the notice of the customers.

Mediator: Well, I believe that we have come to a consensus on the issues.

 SETTLEMENT /CONCLUSION SESSION
(One Scene)
SCENE X

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

Mediator: I appreciate all of you. It appears that we are in a happy mood, a position
to arrive at a consensus on the key issue that we discussed today. As we know
discussions are always better than arguments, we proved it once again. Thanks to all.
I would like to read the settlement arrived at today for further proceedings.

[SETTLEMENT UNDER SECTION 30 OF THE ARBITRATION AND

CONCILIATION ACT, 1996]
 SETTLEMENT DEED

I, SANGEETH MOHAN, BEING MEDIATOR IN THIS MEDIATION SESSION, DO HEREBY

DECLARE THIS MEDIATION SETTLED UNDER THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ACCEPTED
BY BOTH PARTIES ON THE ISSUES RELATED WITH CONSUMER DISPUTE FILED BY
MRS.K.S ABHIRAMI, THE PETITIONER.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK EACH PARTIES WHO MADE THIS MEDIATION A SUCCESS AND
THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS ON WHICH ISSUES IN THIS MEDIATION WAS SETTLED IS
LISTED BELOW WITH THE PARTIES ACCEPTANCE.

SETTLEMENT CONDITIONS

● THE DEFENDANT HAS AGREED TO REPLACE THE TYRE GIVEN AS STEPNY,WITH

A TYRE OF THE SAME SPECIFICATIONS AS THAT OF THE REST OF THE FOUR
WHEELS.
● THE DEFENDANT HAS ALSO REQUESTED A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS FOR
REPLACEMENT OF THE STEPNEY WHEEL.

SIGNATORIES

1. K.S ABHIRAMI : PETITIONER

2. SINGULAR HYUNDAI
3. HYUNDAI MOTORS. : RESPONDENTS

SANGEETH MOHAN
(MEDIATOR)
Date
 DECISIONS

At this juncture both the parties have agreed on the following conditions for sorting
out the difference between the two. The conditions arrived at this session will be
entered in writing to deal with any future issues regarding the same. The common
points flagged may be summarised as follows. (Recording the settlement in the form
of an arbitral award on agreedterms under Sec.30 (2) of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996)

● THE DEFENDANT HAS AGREED TO REPLACE THE TYRE GIVEN AS STEPNY,WITH

A TYRE OF THE SAME SPECIFICATIONS AS THAT OF THE REST OF THE FOUR
WHEELS.
● THE DEFENDANT HAS ALSO REQUESTED A PERIOD OF TWO WEEKS FOR
REPLACEMENT OF THE STEPNEY WHEEL.

Agreed and signed with date by:

AP1- DP1-

DP2-

IP-
 STUDENT DETAILS

UNIVERSIT
S CLASS Y
NAME ROLE
L ROLL REGISTER
ASSIGNED
N NO NUMBER
O
:
DEFENDI
NG
1. 03 ABRAHAM J 47318551003
PART
KANIYAMPADY
Y
(Mr.
Abraha
mJ
Kaniya
mpady)
MEDIATOR
2. 47 SANGEETH 47318551048
(Adv. Sangeeth
MOHAN
Mohan)
AGGRIEVED
3. 5 THEERDHA P 47318551055 PARTY
4 NAIR
(Mrs.
Abhirami K
S)
 APPENDIX

https://www.hyundai.com/in/en/find-a-car/creta/specification: