Indian Supreme Court judge urges wider mediation in family disputes
Justice B.V. Nagarathna has called for greater use of mediation and conciliation in family litigation, saying prolonged proceedings can destroy family relationships and deepen inequality. She proposed reforms covering matrimonial disputes, custody, maintenance and elder welfare, while warning that mediation can be unsafe where violence or coercive control exists.
Indian Supreme Court judge Justice B.V. Nagarathna has called for wider use of mediation and conciliation in family disputes, saying alternative dispute resolution could provide faster and less adversarial outcomes than prolonged litigation. She made the remarks on Saturday while delivering the inaugural address at an Eastern Zone Regional Conference of the Supreme Court’s Committee for Family Court Matters in Guwahati.
Justice Nagarathna chairs the committee. The judge said alternative dispute resolution should complement, rather than compete with, the courts. She highlighted its potential to offer speed, privacy and confidentiality, and said lengthy proceedings often meant that years passed between the filing of pleadings and a final judgment.
By then, she said, family bonds may have been lost. Citing Department of Justice data, Justice Nagarathna said India had 822 functioning family courts as of October 2024. Among eastern States, Bihar had 70,365 pending cases, followed by Odisha with 36,792, Jharkhand with 15,376, Assam with 7,399 and Tripura with 4,010.
She proposed consolidated referrals for related domestic violence and elder-welfare proceedings arising from one household, as well as dedicated geriatric mediation panels. For matrimonial disputes, she recommended pre-litigation mediation and conciliation at the first hearing of contested divorce and restitution petitions. On child custody, she supported involving child psychologists in mediation and using trained professionals to communicate children’s views.
For maintenance and alimony, she proposed financial disclosure during mediation, lump-sum settlements where appropriate and prompt registration of property agreements. Justice Nagarathna cautioned that mediation was inappropriate where violence, coercive control or a serious imbalance of power existed. She also warned against using litigation to humiliate or financially exhaust another party, while noting that genuine victims often continue to suffer in silence.
This independently written report is based on information supplied by the named publisher. Vertrix News has not independently verified the source report.