The development of a family-to-family comparison agreement is a formal way to thwart future disputes that may occur between family members during an event or shipwreck of a person in the family. The formation of a family comparison agreement is a preliminary solution, often suggested by lawyers, before deterring them from taking the matter to court. A case that is the subject of a trial involves significant expenses related to the recruitment of legal officers, the preparation of documents and government costs. In addition, the case needs time for the court to prepare a settlement decision for both parties. After the signing of the agreement by the parties, the parties register the agreement if the purpose of the count is real estate. In accordance with Section 17 of the India Registration Act, a family colony claiming to assign real estate must be registered or the deed would not be valid. Stamp duty is levied on the value of the property on the agreement. Section 73 of the Act authorizes a conciliator to enter into a transaction agreement that is final and binding on the parties. Section 74 nullifies the status of the arbitration premium transaction agreement.
This was confirmed by hon`ble Delhi High Court in Anuradha SA Investments LLC – Anr. v. Parsvnath Developers Limited – Ors 2017 (4) ARBLR 72 (Delhi). The transaction agreement is earlier known as a compromise agreement under labour law. In the transaction agreement, a worker undertakes not to assert certain actions of the labour tribunal against a potential respondent or respondent against an application. It is used when the employee leaves the organization and the payment of employees, including all receivables, is compensated. Certain conditions must be met by the parties for a proper transaction agreement. Both counsel and the Arbitral Tribunal carefully review the documents to determine whether a transaction contract can be transformed into an effective approval decision and protect the rights and interests of the parties in extreme cases. As can be seen from the kataton of the case law, it has been repeated that a transaction agreement can only obtain the colour of a sentence if all correspondence defined in Section 73 is respected. Thus, a transaction agreement between the parties, duly authenticated by the conciliator, will have the same effect of an arbitration award under the agreed contract as an arbitral tribunal duly constituted under section 30 of the law.
For example, hon`ble Delhi High Court in Surinder Kumar Beri v. Deepak Beri – Anr. 2018 (171) DRJ 414, cancelled a transaction agreement under Section 34 of the Act on the grounds that it was contrary to India`s public policy. A similar application of the law was upheld by the UK Supreme Court in Hayward against the UKSC 48 of Zurich Insurance Company . In this case, the court struck down a settlement agreement between an insurer and an insured for fraudulent claims. The collective agreement is enforced in accordance with Section 18 of the Industrial Disputes Act of 1947, when an agreement was reached between workers and employers. Under Section 18 (1) of the Industrial Dispute Act, 1947, an agreement reached by an agreement between the employer and the worker as part of a conciliation procedure only commits the parties to the agreement. Given that the Indian regime distinguishes between mediation and conciliation, it is inevitable that the law will equate the two in terms of uniformity of application and recognition.
Mediation will only function as a viable REL process if it is on an equal footing with conciliation and arbitration.