Meitankeisangbam (Ongbi) Ibemcha Devi v. Meitankeisangbam Indrajit Singh

Judgment

1. Meitankeisangbam Indrajit Singh represented by his LR : Smt. Asharani, aged about 52 years old, w/o (Late) Meitankeisangbam Indrajit Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795005. Shri Meitankeisangbam Binoy Singh, aged about 60 2. years, S/o late M. Ibotombi Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur.

3. Shri Meitangkeisangbam Ibopishak Singh, aged about 50 years, S/o Late M. Ibotombi Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur. With MC(MAT. APP.) No. 2 of 2016 … Respondents Meitankeisangbam (Ongbi) Ibemcha Devi, aged about 32 years, w/o late M. Meghachandra of Khurai Thangjam Leikai presently at Yairipok Nongpok Keithelmanbi, P.O. & P.S. Yairipok in Thoubal District of Manipur. … Applicant P a g e 1 | 11 - Versus -

Meitankeisangbam Indrajit Singh represented by his LR : Smt. Asharani, aged about 52 years old, w/o (Late) Meitankeisangbam Indrajit Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur – 795005.

2. Shri Meitankeisangbam Binoy Singh, aged about 60 years, S/o late M. Ibotombi Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur.

3. Shri Meitangkeisangbam Ibopishak Singh, aged about 50 years, S/o Late M. Ibotombi Singh of Khurai Thangjam Leikai, P.O. & P.S. Porompat, Imphal East District, Manipur. … Respondents B E F O R E HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA For appellant/applicant For respondents Date of order : : : Mr. Md. Murtaza Ahmed, Advocate Mr. H. Maipaksana, Advocate

22.07.2026 [M. Sundar, CJ] O R D E R (Oral) [1] This judgment and order will now dispose of captioned main matrimonial appeal and captioned ‘Miscellaneous Case’ (‘MC’ for the sake of convenience) thereat. P a g e 2 | 11 [2] Read this in conjunction with and in continuation of earlier proceedings made in the previous listing yesterday (21.07.2026) which reads as follows: ‘Item Nos. 5 & 6 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MANIPUR AT IMPHAL Mat. App. No.4 of 2016 With MC(Mat. App.) NO.2 of 2026 M(O) Ibemcha Devi Vrs. Petitioner/s Meitankeishangbam Indrajit Singh represented by his LR M. Asharani and 2 Ors. BEFORE Respondent/s HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. M. SUNDAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA (ORDER) (Order of the Court was made by Mr. M. Sundar, CJ)

21.07.2026 Captioned matter is listed under cause-list caption ‘FOR MEDIATION REPORT’. Mediation report is before this Court, it comes to light that mediation was successful and terms of settlement have been reduced to writing but there is no representation for both sides either in the physical Court or on the Video Conferencing (VC) platform. However, with the intention of giving an opportunity to litigants on both sides and learned counsel on both sides, let captioned matter be listed again tomorrow i.e., 22.07.2026. List under the caption ‘ON MEDIATION REPORT’ tomorrow i.e., 22.07.2026. Ab. Surjit ‘ JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE P a g e 3 | 11 [3] Today, Mr. Md. Murtaza Ahmed, learned counsel for lone appellant and Mr. H. Maipaksana, learned counsel representing Mr. L. Sanamacha, learned counsel on record for all respondents are before this Court (Physical Court). [4] To be noted, Mr. Md. Murtaza Ahmed has been appointed as Pro Bono counsel by a predecessor Bench vide a judicial order but Registry has not shown his name in the cause list. Learned counsel submits that he missed the matter yesterday as his name was not shown in the cause list. To be noted, today also his name has not been shown in the cause list but learned counsel has diligently come before this Court. [5] As regards the respondents, Mr. H. Maipaksana, learned counsel submits that Mr. L. Sanamacha Singh is indisposed and therefore he missed the matter yesterday. Learned counsel expresses regret on behalf of Mr. L. Sanamacha Singh for having missed the matter yesterday. [6] Be that as it may, as already captured in earlier proceedings made in the previous listing yesterday, captioned matter was referred to mediation, mediation was successful and terms of settlement have been reduced to writing vide a settlement agreement dated 15.07.2026 which has been duly signed by lone appellant/MC P a g e 4 | 11 applicant and all three respondents as well as their respective counsel. This ‘settlement agreement dated 15.07.2026’ shall be referred to as ‘said settlement agreement’ for the sake of convenience. [7] Cover letter of Secretary of HCLSC (High Court Legal Service Committee) under which said settlement agreement has been sent to this Court and the said settlement agreement (scanned reproduction) are as follows: P a g e 5 | 11 P a g e 6 | 11 P a g e 7 | 11 [8] Afore-referred learned counsel on both sides confirmed that the parties have arrived at settlement in mediation, and the terms of settlement have been reduced to writing vide afore-referred said settlement agreement and both learned counsel also request for a judicial order/judgment in terms of said settlement agreement. [9] Sections 19 (1) and 27 of ‘Mediation Act, 2023 (32 of 2023)’ {‘said Act’ for the sake of brevity and clarity} which is a conditional legislation, are yet to be notified i.e., yet to kick in/come into force {though Section 3 (n) which defines ‘mediated settlement agreement’ has kicked in}. Therefore, we accede to afore-referred joint/common request of learned counsel on both sides made in unison. P a g e 8 | 11 In this regard, we deem it appropriate to write that said Act consists of 65 Sections (XI Chapters) and ten Schedules, it is dated 14.09.2023, the same has been published in the Gazette of India on 15.09.2023, it is a conditional legislation as would be evident from sub-Section (3) of Section 1 and only 21 of the 65 Sections have come into for force/kicked in vide Central Government Notification dated 09.10.2023 bearing reference No. S.O. 4384(E). To be noted, in this regard, Section 1 of Mediation Act, 2023 to the extent relevant and 09.10.2023 notification of Central Government read as follows: ‘1. (1) ....................................................................... (2) ....................................................................... (3) It shall come into force on such date as the Central Government may, by notification, appoint and different dates may be appointed for different provisions of this Act and any reference in any such provision to the commencement of this Act, shall be construed as a reference to the coming into force of that provision.’ P a g e 9 | 11 [10] This Court, before proceeding further deems it appropriate to reproduce afore-referred Sections 3 and 19 to the extent relevant, Section 27 of said Act, we do so and the same read as follows: ‘3. Definitions. otherwise requires, - - Int this Act, unless the context (a) …………………………………………………………………………………….. (b) …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. ………………………………………………………………………….…………. (m) ……………………………………………………………………………………. (n) “mediated settlement agreement” means mediated settlement agreement referred to in sub-section (1) of section 19; (o) …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. …………………………………………………………………………………….. (y) ……………………………………………………………………….……………’ (1) A mediated ‘19. Mediated settlement agreement. - settlement agreement includes an agreement in writing between some or all of the parties resulting from mediation, settling some or all of the disputes between such parties, and authenticated by the mediator: Provided that the terms of the mediated settlement agreement may extend beyond the disputes referred to mediation. Explanation. A mediated settlement agreement which is void under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 (9 of 1872), shall not be deemed to be lawful settlement agreement within the meaning of mediated settlement agreement. (2) ……………………………………………………………………………………. (3) …………………………………………………………….……………………… (4) ……………………………………………………………….…………………… (5) …………………………………………………………………………………...’ ‘27. Enforcement of mediated settlement agreement. – (1) A mediated settlement agreement resulting from a mediation signed by the parties and authenticated by the mediator shall be final and binding on the parties and persons claiming under them respectively and enforceable as per the provisions of sub-section (2). (2) Subject to the provisions of section 28, the mediated settlement agreement shall be enforced in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (5 of 1908), in P a g e 10 | 11 the same manner as if it were a judgment or decree passed by a court, and may, accordingly, be relied on by any of the parties or persons claiming through them, by way of defence, set off or otherwise in any legal proceeding.’ [11] To be noted, though obvious, for the sake of specificity, we deem it appropriate to write that the ex-parte judgment and order dated 26.06.2015 made by Family Court, Manipur at Lamphelpat in Mat. (G & W) Suit No. 25 of 2014 stands effaced/merged with instant order. [12] Registry is directed to draft an appropriate decree and furnish it to both parties subject to parties applying for certified copies of the same and complying with procedural and other requirements. [13] Notwithstanding settlement by resorting to mediation, this Court is marking instant order as ‘Reportable’ owing to elucidation qua said Act and the need to make a judicial order in terms of settlement arrived at in mediation. [14] Ergo, sequitur is, captioned main matrimonial appeal and captioned MC thereat are disposed of in terms of said settlement agreement (scanned and reproduced supra) which shall now form part of instant judgment/order. There shall be no order as to costs. Bipin FR/NFR JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE P a g e 11 | 11