TEAM CODE: 20

PART -II
ROLE PLAY

PARTIES INVOLVED:

1. Mrs Annamma Johny, W/O C.P.Johny residing at Charuvilathekkethil Udayam House,

Puthenchantha Muri,Vallikunnam Village in Alappuzha District– The Complainant
2. Ms. Drishiya Mohan (Divisional Head), C/O Great Benefit Insurance Company, St Thomas
Junction, Alappuzha – The Respondent

CONCILIATOR: Adv. Rithu Varma

 LIST OF CONTENTS

Ø GENERAL INTRODUCTION ON ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

(ADR) .........................................................................................................................2
Ø THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION...............6
Ø FACTS OF THE CASE) ............................................................................................8
Ø FACTS IN ISSUE ......................................................................................................8
Ø SCRIPT OF THE ROLE PLAY.................................................................................9

¨ INTRODUCTORY SESSION........................................................................9
¨ PRESENTING SESSION .............................................................................10
¨ CONSENSUS SESSION............................................................................... 16
¨ SETTLEMENT /CONCLUSION SESSION ................................................17

Ø DECISIONS .............................................................................................................18
Ø STUDENT DETAILS ..............................................................................................19

1
 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 cases1 . "Wide range of process are defined as alternative dispute

2
 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

Ø 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 disputes will ever
occur.

3
 Ø CONCILIATION:

Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution process whereby the parties to a dispute use a
conciliator, 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 conciliator 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 conciliator, 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 conciliator
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 conciliator 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 conciliator, the agreement had the effect of an arbitration
award and is legally tenable in any court in the country.

Ø 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.

4
 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.

Ø 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
communication2 . 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 sentence3 . 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 different4 .

Ø 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.

5
 THE OPTED METHOD OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

In the case selected, Conciliation is the best option that the parties can choose to solve their
dispute. The present nationwide COVID spread compels us to select the E-conciliation
technique for resolving this dispute since a scenario of sitting together and a physical meeting
and discussions are not practically possible.

Ø E-CONCLIATION

Conciliation is an option out-of-court dispute resolution instrument. Like mediation,

conciliation is a deliberate, adaptable, confidential, and intrigue based procedure. The parties
seek to arrive at an amicable dispute settlement with the help of the conciliator, who acts as an
unbiased 3rd party.

The fundamental distinction between conciliation and mediation procedures is that, eventually
during the conciliation, the conciliator will be asked by the parties to give them a non-binding
settlement proposal. A mediator, on the other hand, will as a rule and as an issue of standard,
refrain from making such a proposition.

Conciliation is a wilful proceedings, where the parties involved are allowed to agree and
endeavour to resolve their dispute by conciliation. The procedure is flexible, permitting parties
to define the time, structure and substance of the conciliation procedures. These proceedings
are once in a while public. They are interest based, as the conciliator will while proposing a
settlement, not just consider the parties' legal positions, yet in addition their; commercial,
financial and/or personal interests

E-conciliation also known as electronic conciliation is a type of negotiation procedure, which

is performed by utilizing Information Communication Technology tool (ICT tool). E-
conciliation is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) that is conducted online. Thus,
the e-conciliation procedure possesses all features and respects the requirements applicable to
traditional conciliation.

The benefits that conciliation offers are clear and obvious. It's not only cheaper and quicker but
also is less stressful which is extremely important in these testing times. However, conciliation
itself is difficult at a time when social distancing and lockdowns are the norm. At present,
companies often use e-conciliation to resolve disputes that are of a high-volume and deals with

6
matters where distance is long. An example is conflicts between customers of eBay or Amazon.
Yet at this point, the scope of matters being negotiated online has extended to incorporate
working environment and family clashes including individuals who live in a similar region.
Online conciliation is usually done through all electronic means that include emails, audio calls,
video calls, and real time chats. Documents are sent via email but usually become a part of an
e- discovery process. This online form of conciliation offers several advantages over traditional
conciliation.

An online discussion levels the playing field where one party may be dominant in nature or
due to class, financial, social, cultural, or physical reasons. There is scope for increased
transparency because everything is being recorded. With a record of the emails and reasoning's
being given by the conciliators the parties can be confident that the mediation will not be
ignored in any litigation. Since the conciliator has to clarify the legal position to the disputants
by showing the likely court outcome and support it with case law and statue there is a greater
burden on the mediator to ensure that the response is skilled.

Finally and perhaps most importantly, it's often stated by communication experts that 80% of
communication is non-verbal. These nonverbal cues often end up enflaming the matter rather
than resolving it. People spend far more time concentrating on the 'tone' rather than the content
of voice. These misunderstandings of non-verbal sparring can be spared if the conciliation is
taking place solely on factual matters that are presented in text with little room for reading
between the lines

7
 PROBLEM

Annamma Johny is a 71-year-old woman, residing in Vallikunnam village, Alappuzha District. On

06.03.2019, she was riding a Hero Honda bike along the Chennampalli-Thengamom Public Road
from South to North at about 10:40 AM. On reaching a place called Cherupuncha, anotherbike, driven
by one Sibin Jospeh, which came from the opposite direction hit her bike. It was a Bajaj bike
registered under the name of one Mr. Joseph Samuel, who was riding behind. Due to the forceful hit,
the bike and Annamma fell onto the road. She was rushed to the Holy Cross Hospital, Adoor where
she was treated for the multiple injuries sustained. Her injuries include c/o pain in the right gluteal
region and coccygeal region and also multiple injuries all over the body. An F.I.R was registered at
the Adoor police station as registered crime number 663/2019.Both Shibin Joseph and Joseph Samuel
are residing at Adoor.
She was a healthy person before the accident but as a result of this accident, have been permanently
disabled. She has already spent a huge amount of money for treatment and continues to do so even
now. Her hospital expenses and the vehicle repair have all come to an estimated amount of Rs 3, 00,
00/-. The case between the parties is pending before the Motor Accidents Tribunal in Pathanamthitta
but she is in immediate need for financial assistance for which Annamma approached her insurance
company, The Great Benefit Foundation in Alappuzha. Her original motor insurance is a
comprehensive motor insurance and covers all financial losses dueto damages caused by accidents or
malicious acts and so on. The insurance company failed to accept her request on various ground for
which they have not been clear.

Due to her inability to afford all her expenses, she approached the Sub Court, Alappuzha for a suit
against her insurance company. The Court entrusted the mediation cell to arrive in to an outof court
settlement in this matter. Convene the same.

FACTS IN ISSUE

1. Whether Annamma is entitled to the motor insurance?

2. Whether the reasons stated for the rejection of application of insurance is reasonable?

8
 ROLE PLAY SCRIPT

CONCILIATOR: Adv. Rithu Varma

PARTIES:
1. Mrs. Annamma Johny – Aggrieved Party [AP1]
2. Mrs Drishiya Mohan, Divisional Head,
Great Benefit Insurance Company -Defending Party [DP1]

INTRODUCTORY SESSION
(Two Scenes)
SCENE I

[All Negotiators and the Conciliator join into common web media platform and exchange greetings
and pleasantries within the group. The Conciliator requests all attendees to be seated; he formally
greets all of them.]
(Conciliator 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).

CONCILIATOR: Good Morning All. I am, Rithu Varma, a practicing lawyer and appointed
conciliator for this case. I have been practicing as a conciliator for the last 6 years. As your conciliator
I am here to resolve the disputes between both the parties and to reach an amicable settlement for the
same. You can feel free to address your respective grievances and issues and based on your reasonable
interest, as a conciliator 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. 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.

9
 SCENE II

[The participants start to introduce themselves, starting with Mrs. Annamma.]

Mrs Annamma (AP1): Good Morning. I am Annamma, a 71 year old who is being harassed by
them. [Mrs Annamma seems to be angry and Mrs Drishiya has next turn.]

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): I am the divisional head of the Alapuzha Division of Great Benefit. [She
acknowledges.]

PRESENTING SESSION
(Five scenes)

SCENE III

CONCILIATOR: Well, as both of you have introduced yourself let’s move to the issue athand. 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 suchthat refrain from all possible interferences. Both of
you have to keep the decorum and let’sconduct this session civilly and peacefully.

[Mrs Drishiya getting ready for her oral submissions]

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Maam , we are reputed insurance company in Kerala. We have been providing
all kinds of insurance and helping our clients like our own family. Our repute is such that our clients
trust us. Most of our clients are middle class families keeping aside money for a rainy day. Though
most insurance we provide are with specific consideration, we meet a long list of clients who approach
us at the least inconvenience looking to receive the amount even if none of the condition of the
insurance are met. In Mrs. Annamma’s case, she met with the accident almost two years ago, but it
was only six months ago that she approached us for her comprehensive vehicle insurance. We could
only reject her application because her insurance stipulated a period of one year after an accident to
approach us.

10
Further she also failed to submit an independent medical examination which we had made clear to her
on cases such as this….

[Mrs.Annamma in her desperate to make her move to speak]

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): It is true that I approached them only six months ago, but I was bedridden
for so long and I was not in a state to make any such request beforehand. But these people are holding
money and they should be able to make it available to me when I need. Iam denied my earnings in
time of a emergency.
Mrs Drishiya (DPI): we are an insurance company who faces many cases like this. We cannot make
her an exception if she has not abided by any of the conditions. Further it has come to our
understanding that she is also suing the owners and insurance company of the other party in accident
to receive compensation. I do not see how she needs amount from ustoo.

[Pointing both the parties and communicates]

CONCILIATOR: Alright. What we need here is a reasonable settlement protecting the interest of
both of you.

[Mrs. Annamma showing some inconvenient gestures and attitude.]

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): I can only reach a settlement where I can get my money from these people
who cheated me.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): We cannot just give her money when she has not abided by ourprocess.

[Mrs.Annamma becomes a little emotional.]

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): But it’s my money and I need it more than any time before now.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): But ma’am, like we have already said, we cannot give you the amountas such
without proper procedure.

11
 SCENE-IV

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): You never told me about any of this procedure when I was taking the
insurance. This is just their excuse to deny my claim, the claim which is mine.

[Mrs Drishya shakes her head and shows her complete disagreement with Mrs.Annamma and strives
forward with her arguments.]

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): We have said about all this conditions in the documents that we shared with
you at the time of the plan. We did make it clear that you need to go through that documentation.

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): I can’t believe that you are saying that you have told me. The documents
were a bunch of papers with big words which made little sense to me. You didnot take the time to
even make it clear for me or even explain to me its contents. You justbriefly told me my plan covered
a all kind of needs I have regarding my vehicle.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Your husband told us that he understands the entire thing and said he will
explain everything to you. It is not our fault if he did not do so. You should maybe ask him why he
never explained.
[CONCILIATOR intervenes in between trying to hold the topic from deviating.]

CONCILIATOR: Let’s stop talking about other people. You are both mature persons. So to be
reasonable and make a settlement based on your relative interests.

SCENE-V

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): We rejected her claim for genuine reasons only. She did not seek for insurance
within twelve months of the accident.

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): It is true but that time I was not in state, and I expected compensation from
the persons who hit me. Since that is lagging, I am in dire need ofmoney.

12
Mrs Drishiya (DPI): I cannot blindly twist rules for her. If she needs the amount now thereis another
set of process involved and we told her about it.

Mrs.Annamma (AP1): And I told you I have submitted all documents regarding the accident
including the photograph.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Ma,am, we have already told you that we need a separate medicalexamination.
Also like we said, your disability is not covered in your Bike insurance package. It is not included in
the add-on and therefore we are not obligated.

SCENE- VI

CONCILIATOR: Our main issue is regarding the amount that Mrs. Annamma can claim or receive
right?

Mrs. Annamma(AP1): That is true. I asked for an amount of 3,00,000/- lakhs for all mylosses as a
result of the accident.

CONCILIATOR: And Mrs Drishiya your company is rejecting claim because the period has elapsed
and also it is a wrong claim? Is that correct?

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Yes, for the accident she should claim the amount within a year after the
accident and she did so only after a period of 1 year and 5 months have elapsed. Even if we can let
that go, she is asking for a claim not including in her insurance add on. And then there is the issue
where Mrs. Annamma is not listening to us when we say that she needs to submit a few more
documents.

CONCILIATOR: Oh, I see. And Mrs Annamma what do you have to say?

Mrs. Annamma (AP1): This issue can only be settled if I get back my money. I did everything they
asked me to, yet they are not giving me anything.

13
[*The unwillingness of Drishiya with Annamma’s settlement terms were visible from her body
language.]

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): We sincerely told you what you need to do to get the amount. And we made it
specifically clear on how much you have the claim to.

Mrs. Annamma (AP1): I now feel like I deserve to get damages for the mental pain, agony that I
suffered as a result of you are doing to me. I am a very old women and I have the rightto the amount
that I seek.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Ma’am I am making it clear that you did not come to us within thestipulated
period and even so your claim is rejected because it’s not a part of your actual plan. We do not cover
disability. You have not seeked that in your plan.

CONCILIATOR: I like to say that an Insurance company can reject the claim on the said grounds
but Mrs. Annamma, the company will give the same on a new application with thecorrect add-on.
This is my understanding. Is that right?

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): That is exactly what I am saying.

Mrs Annamma (AP1): But they never told me any of this. They just blindly rejected my claim
without stating any reason. And they made me go after then for so long.

(Sobbing) [Mrs Annamma also gets a little bit emotional.]

Mrs Annamma (API): I am so sorry. But I am tired. I am not yet fully recovered from the accident.
I cannot do anything without the help of someone. For a person like me that is very difficult, and
these people kept making me run here and there in my situation. If only they told me any of this
sooner.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): But ma’am, we did tell you this and even send you a letter for thesame.

14
 SCENE-VII

[CONCILIATOR suddenly felt that there is a slight possibility resolving the conflict and he
madeherstatement without much time.]

CONCILIATOR: What I understand is that this entire thing is a misunderstanding between the two
parties. Mrs.Annamma, why don’t you give the application again? This time don’t seek insurance for
your disability rather only on what is included in your plan?

[Mrs Annamma became speechless for a moment as she got. confused.]

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Maam , that is I exactly what we have been saying.

Mrs Annamma (AP1): Then will I be able to get any kind of amount?

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): Yes, ma’am. Like we already said, you need to only give us another application
for the same and we will give you an amount of lakhs, excluding the 1 lakh you claimed for your
disability because that does not come within your insurance plan. But sincethe period expired consider
this a loan that you need to repay on settlement of your case.

Mrs Annamma (AP1): Oh.

CONCILIATOR: 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.

15
 CONSENSUS SESSION
(Two Scenes)

SCENE VIII

CONCILIATOR: 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.

Mrs Drishiya (DP1): I am actually ready to make a compromise here as I understand her situation
and I would like to make resolution easier. If only she had made it an point to listento me sooner.

Mrs Annamma (API): What do you expect from me now?

Mrs Drishiya (DP1): I just want afresh application without the disability claim. And you will have
to return whatever amount we give you soon enough.

SCENE IX

CONCILIATOR: Annamma, you should have tried to understand what the company wastelling you
before jumping into the case.

Mrs. Annamma (AP1): Okay, but they just said a lot of things to do and I had no idea whatto do.
And all the while they did not try to give me the money that belongs to me rightfully.

CONCILIATOR: Yes, that is why Drishiya considering her old age, your company should have tried
to resolve this amicably. You should have tried to make her understand your rejection and grounds.
Being a senior citizen you could have minimized all this stress for her.

Mrs Drishiya (DPI): You need to understand that we would reject claims which are not based on
what is agreed in your insurance plan. Therefore you need to first understand everything about your
plan. We will first tell everything that you need including the amountyou can claim.

16
Mrs. Annamma (AP1): I will then do as you say but I need this process to move forward. Ineed the
same for my treatment. You cannot kick me around like a ball this time.

CONCILIATOR: Well, I believe the issues are sorted out.

SETTLEMENT /CONCLUSION SESSION

(One Scene)
SCENE X

[Conciliator is seen showingherinterest to close in on the consensus]

CONCILIATOR: I appreciate all of you. It appears that we are 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]

Date:

17
 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)

1. Annamma has agreed to apply for the insurance in the correct terms again.
2. Abraham, on behalf of the Great Benefit has agreed to accept the application even if theperiod to
seek it has elapsed considering the special circumstances.
3. Annamma can seek an amount up to 2 Lakhs from the insurance company.
4. The company is reserved the right to reject the application again if it does not adhere tothe terms
for claiming the amount

Agreed and signed with date by:

AP1- DP1-

IP-

18
 STUDENT DETAILS

UNIVERSITY
SL CLASS ROLL NAME REGISTER ROLE ASSIGNED
NO: NO NUMBER
DEFENDING
PARTY
1. 12 ANJU KUNJUMON 47317551011
(Mrs Drishiya
Mohan)
CONCILIATOR
2. 25 DARSANA VIKRAM 47317551025
(Adv. Rithu Varma)

AGGRIEVED
PARTY
3. 52 POOJA S KUMAR 47317551051
(Mrs. Annamma
Johny)

19