LL.B.
V Term, Faculty of Law, University of Delhi
MOOT COURT, MOCK TRAIL AND INTERNSHIP
TITLE: REPORT ON MEDIATION SESSION
COUNSEL: TEJASVI AND SHUSMITA ROY
CLIENT: SOURABH SONI(SUNIL) & RICHA SINGH(HEENA)
Date of Submission: 29/11/2024
Submitted To: Mr. Kunal Kishore
Submission by: Sourabh Soni
Section: C
Semester: 5th sem.
Class Roll No.: 227898
Examination Roll No.: 22311806879
FACTS
❖ Ramesh married to Saloni in 1990, After marriage they had two children,
Heena and Rahul in 1992.However after sometime due to continuous
disputes between them, they mutually decided to get divorce and got the
decree in 2002 and he was given custody of both child by the court. In 2003
he married to a girl name Sakshi.So after the marriage Heena, Rahul lived
together with us. Due to his health issues he made a will in 2015 in which
Ramesh stated that after his death, 70% of his property will be equally
divided between Heena and Rahul and the rest 30% property to be divided
equally between Riya and Suniel but he didn’t register the will, he died in
2019.However the will was made under influence and pressure from Heena
and Rahul. Hence the will mostly favoured them. So the will should be
declare invalid as it was unregistered and was made under influence.
QueSTionnAireS For ClienTS
1. What are the objectives of the Interview:
Ans. The objectives of the interview are to:-
• To communicate concerns regarding share in the property in the will made by
Ramesh
• Whether the will made is invalid or not as it is an unregistered will, if it is
invalid then declare the will made null and void
• To resolve the deadlock among heirs and come to the mutually agreeable
solution
• To escape from the litigation expanses and get speedy resolution as litigation
is time consuming and hectic one.
2. Key Facts of the Client’s Legal Problem:
Ans.
The problem is regarding the share in the property in the will. The will made
by Ramesh is not valid as it was made under influence of the heirs from the
first marriage and it is a unregistered will & merely handwritten. And the fact
that after the divorce from first wife Ramesh lived with us and we took care
of my father when he was suffering but even after this the will was made
mostly in the favors of child born out of first marriage as they pressured him
and forced to make the will in favour of them. Hence the property share
percentage in the will should be 50%-50% instead of 70% -30%.
3. Client's Desired Outcome(s):
Ans. The desired outcomes are –
• To Declare the will invalid
• Property should be divided equally among the heirs (50%-50%)
• Deadlock and the conflict should be solved mutually among the heirs
DiAlogueS
Mediator 1: Good Morning parties, please have a seat and some water I am Tejasvi
Kalra, an authorised mediator in Delhi Mediation centre, I have been mediating
between the parties for almost 12 years and she is my Co-Mediator Shusmita Roy. I
hope you didn’t have any trouble finding our office. The parties can free to address
me by my first name
.
Mediator 2:- Good Morning parties, I am Shusmita Roy, a certified mediator in
International Mediation Institute and I have been mediating between the parties for
8 years. The parties can free to address me by my first name.. You all are welcome
here and it is a good decision for choosing mediation as a option instead of expensive
and time consuming Litigation. Now I request the parties to introduce themselves.
Client 1:- Good Morning Tejasvi and Shusmita, I am Sunil and thanks for your warm
welcome and the greetings.
Client 2:- Good Morning Tejasvi and Shusmita, I am Heena and thanks for giving
us your valuable time.
Mediator 2: Thankyou Parties is it alright if I address both the parties by their first
name.
Client 1: Yeah sure no problem.
Client 2: Yes you can.
Mediator 1: Excellent! before proceed further we would like to explain the ground
rules for mediation process. We will be discussing the disputes between the parties
and our entire goal is to help both of you reach on a mutually acceptable agreement.
Mediator 2: The session will be 20 mins long. You can share anything and
everything you feel is relevant to your concerns. After both parties have narrated
their issues, we will attempt to mediate and arrived at an amicable resolution.
Mediator 1: This session will be completely confidential we are bound by attorney
client privilege and are not obligated to disclose any information shared here today
to any third party and if any deadlock occurs between the parties we will conduct
private sessions to end the deadlocks.
Mediator 2: It is requested to the parties to not to use unparliamentary language
during the sessions. Are the parties authorised by the other parties involved in the
present case?
Client 1: Yes, I am authorised by my sister i.e., Riya.
Client 2: Yes, I am authorized by my brother i.e., Rahul and my mother i.e., Saloni.
Any decision taken by me during the session will be acceptable to them.
Mediator1: Now I would just like to know from the parties if it is the first time
participating in Mediation session.
Client 1: yes, it is my first time.
Client 2: yes
Mediator 2: Lets begins with the opening sessions. And I would again like to request
to not to use unparliamentary language in the Mediation session.
Client 1: Thank you for giving us this stage for setting up the issue. The concerned
issue is regarding the share in the property in the will made by my father, actually
my father married two times and I am the son born from the second marriage and
was living with my father and mother from the very beginning but before the death
of my father, under the influence and coercion of Henna and Rahul he made a will
in which he wrote that after his death 70% of his property will be equally divided
between Heena and Rahul and rest 30% of the property will be divided among us.
The will is a handwritten of my father but it is not a registered will. This clearly
shows that my father was under the pressure at time of making the will and has no
intentions to execute the will in near future.
Client 2: As the Mediators already observed that what my loveable brother said that
is correct in some circumstances but not in all. Let me correct the statement of my
Loveable brother, my father clearly stated in his will that 70% of his property must
be equally divided between me and my brother i.e., Rahul. The will is attested by
two of our neighbours.This decision was made by him after considering our future
and our wellbeing after his death. My father was a well-educated person and I
believed that his will reflects his true intentions and knowledge and I want that to be
respected.
Mediator 1: Alright the main issue in the present case is regarding the validity of
will and the shares in the property of your father.
Client 1: yes, you are right Mr Tejasvi.
Mediator 2: So, Mr. Sunil how do you believe that the will made by your father,
made under the influence of Heena and Rahul.
Client 1: After the divorce from the first marriage, my father got the custody of the
Heena and Rahul and they were living with us. They always emotionally pressurised
my father to give his property to them. So due to consistent pressure from their side
and his bad health, he was forced to make this will.
Client 2: Sorry to interrupt in between I want to add some facts regarding the bad
behaviour of Sunil and Riya with my father and usually they did not give respect
and always abused my father so my father gave less share to them and it is not correct
that me and my brother did any undue influence to my father and forced him to make
the will in our favour. My father made the will out of love and affection towards us.
Mediator 1: Alright, I heard both of you, can you show me the will and the
documents of all the properties of your father so that I can you assist you further.
Client 2: Yes Sir! Here it is.
Mediator 2: Please tell us what are your demands to solve the dispute.
Client 1: As the will is unregistered and it is merely a piece of paper so the property
must be divided equally among all the heirs as per the law.
Client 2: No No! Although the will is not registered but it is attested by two
witnesses which clearly implicates that the will is valid as per the law.
Mediator 1: Okay okay! Please cool down and maintain the decorum of the
mediation, there seems to be a deadlock between the parties. So, I think it is time for
a private session of each party.
Mediator 2: I am agree with Mr. Tejasvi, there should be a private sessions to end
this deadlock. I would like to request Mr. Sunil to wait outside the hall until we call
you back.
Client 1: Okay Ma’am! (Sunil leaves the room)
Mediator 2: So, Miss Heena, can you tell us the date when your father died?
Client 2: In 2019
Mediator 1: Alright! As per my knowledge of law the will has to probate within 3
years of the issue occurred between the parties after the death of testator this will is
barred by Limitation Act 1963 the time has already been lapsed and hence very less
chance to be probated in favour of both parties. So, I would like to suggest you to
consider this fact and your stand about the shares in the property.
Client 2: I respect that Sunil and Riya are also my father’s children however they
claimed for 50% of the property is unfair to me and Rahul but I also want to end up
the dispute among us hence, I would like to offer 40% of the entire property to them.
Mediator 1: I appreciate your offer; can we disclose this offer to Mr. Sunil to know
about his opinion for the same.
Client 2: Yes, Sure!
Mediator 2: I would like to request Miss Heena to wait outside the hall until we call
you back.
Client 2: Okay Ma’am! (Heena leaves the room)
Client 1: (Mr. Sunil arrives in the room)
Mediator 2: I have talked to Heena and they have offered you a total share of 40%
in the property. And I would like to inform you Mr. Sunil that as per the law it is
irrelevant whether the will is registered or not hence the validity of the will remains
the same.
Would you like to consider this offer?
Client 1: I appreciate Heena’s offer about the share but it is not feasible for us to
accept this offer and I also want to settle this dispute mutually and to end the
deadlock among us. I give a counter offer to Miss Heena to give us 45% share in the
property.
Mediator 1: To end this deadlock now we would like to call a joint session to
resolve the dispute amicably between both the parties.
Client 2: (joins the session)
Mediator 2: I would like to inform and ask the stand of Miss Heena against the
counter offer given by Mr. Sunil in which he demanded 45% Share in the property
instead of 50% Share.
Client 2: okay okay ! If this demand ends the dispute among us and will unite our
family again and make our bond stronger then I am ready to give 45% shares to
them.
Client 1: Thankyou Heena for your great decision, I hope this decision will make
our bond stronger.And I would like to thank mediators for helping us out throught
this dispute
Client 2: We’re fully satisfied with the session and I would like to thank the
mediators for the great efforts which made easy for us to take the decision.
Mediator 1: it was a great session among us and we are happy to solve your dispute
and to reach a final agreement between the parties. I have drafted the Memorandum
of settlement in which a detailed information regarding the share of the parties in the
properties of father are mentioned. Please come and signed here.
