In the world of disagreements, not finding a solution is like starting a journey without directions. PrivateCourt is your guide, making sure every problem finds a way to an amicable RESOLUTION!

Private Court Symbol
The International Court of ARBITRATION


Got any

Write to us

Share this page

Non Govt. Pvt. Finance Company V Business Owner

Case Number: PVTCRT/CD/Pvt. Finance Company V Small Business Owner
Date of Claim raised: 12/08/2023
Date of Conciliation: 21/08/2023
Date of Settlement: 21/08/2023
Digest: Mediation/Conciliation/Dispute/Claimant/Respondent/Invoice/Settlement
Case Summary

In the bustling streets of Pune, Maharashtra, a financial dispute brewed between two parties that found its resolution at PrivateCourt. The Claimant, a Non-government Finance Company, hailing from the serene Trikuta Nagar in Jammu, established in 1997, were steadfast in their pursuit of justice against the Respondent, a small business owner from Kakade Residency in Chinchwad, Pune. The heart of the matter was a disputed sum of Rs. 10,000/-, the cause of which remains at the crux of this case study.

Exhausted from the ceaseless struggle to recover the owed amount, the Claimant eventually sought refuge in the services of PrivateCourt. The case had reached an impasse, and PrivateCourt emerged as the beacon of hope for a peaceful resolution. The Claimant, with their roots in Jammu, and the Respondent, deeply embedded in Pune, decided to embark on a journey of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) under the able guidance of the PrivateCourt team.

The Issue

The roots of this dispute ran deep, sprouting from four distinct issues:

Payment Obligation: The Claimant asserted that the Respondent owed them a sum of Rs. 10,000/-. The Respondent, however, contested this claim, arguing that the debt had been erroneously calculated.

Breach of Agreement: The parties had initially agreed on a repayment schedule, which the Respondent allegedly failed to adhere to. This breach of agreement escalated the dispute further.

Interest Accrual: Another bone of contention was the interest accrued on the disputed amount. The Claimant contended that the Respondent was liable for this interest, while the Respondent vehemently disagreed.

Communication Breakdown: The breakdown of communication between the parties had exacerbated the dispute, with both sides accusing the other of failing to respond to correspondence.

As the dispute festered, PrivateCourt stepped in to mediate, with a meticulous plan to bring these warring factions to an amicable resolution.

The PrivateCourt Proceedings

PrivateCourt, known for its unbiased and professional approach, began by sending notices to both parties, invoking the conciliation process. The notices detailed the expectations, timelines, and the process to be followed. The teams at PrivateCourt requested relevant documents from both sides, ensuring that all facts were on the table.

The PrivateCourt conciliator, well-versed in the nuances of dispute resolution, scheduled a conciliation meeting via Zoom and audio calls, accommodating the parties' convenience. To their surprise, the Claimant and Respondent, perhaps realizing the benefits of amicable settlement, engaged in positive discussions.

The Respondent conveyed their willingness to settle the dispute outside of a courtroom setting, a turn of events that PrivateCourt viewed with great encouragement. It was a testament to the efficacy of ADR in resolving disputes without the need for lengthy and costly litigation.

The Settlement Agreement

With both parties on the path to reconciliation, PrivateCourt facilitated the drafting and execution of a Settlement Agreement in accordance with Section 73 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The terms were crystal clear:

The Respondent agreed to pay the settled amount of Rs. 10,000/- to the Claimant on or before the 5th of September, 2023.

The agreement also stipulated that any future disputes arising from the settlement agreement would be resolved through e-arbitration, as per PrivateCourt's established rules and protocols, ensuring a fair and efficient resolution mechanism.

The Inference

In this case, PrivateCourt was a prudent mediator, guiding the parties from the brink of litigation toward an amicable resolution. The willingness of both the Claimant and Respondent to engage in constructive dialogue underscores the effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution methods like conciliation. It serves as a testament to the potential for resolving disputes with equanimity and mutual respect, avoiding the protracted legal battles that often drain resources and prolong the agony for all involved. PrivateCourt's role in bringing about this resolution serves as a beacon of hope for those seeking swift and equitable solutions to their disputes.