CUTTACK: Emphasising the sanctity and finality of mediated settlements, the Orissa High Court has refused to entertain an application seeking additional relief after a successful mediation between estranged spouses, holding that such attempts undermine the statutory framework governing mediation.
A division bench of Justices Manash Ranjan Pathak and Sibo Sankar Mishra ruled that once a mediation settlement is voluntarily signed, it attains enforceability akin to a civil court decree and cannot be reopened at the instance of one party. The judgement delivered on January 21 was uploaded on February 6.
The ruling arose from a matrimonial appeal where the husband and wife, married in July 2010, had been locked in litigation since 2010-11. Their marriage was dissolved by a Family Court decree in 2019, which was challenged by the wife before the high court. The matter was referred to the Orissa High Court Mediation Centre on July 28, 2025, where the parties amicably settled the dispute.
As per the final mediation report dated November 21, 2025, the husband agreed to pay `13 lakh as permanent alimony in three instalments by March 2026 and hand over specified household articles. Both parties consented to withdraw pending criminal cases and waive future claims.
However, 12 days after the mediation report was submitted, the wife filed an application seeking return of gold ornaments allegedly given at the time of marriage. The husband opposed the plea, asserting that the ornaments had already been taken and questioning the maintainability of the application after a concluded settlement.
Rejecting the plea, the bench noted that the mediation report contained a detailed list of articles, including items of minor value, making the claim of inadvertent omission of gold jewellery implausible.
The bench also cited Clause 6 of the settlement, which recorded that the wife shall have no right to claim any movable or immovable property of the husband in any manner and held that reopening settled terms would encourage uncertainty and abuse of process.