The Supreme Court of India has referred a long-standing property dispute between industrialist Babasaheb Neelkanth Kalyani and his sister, Sugandha Hiremath, to former Supreme Court judge Justice L. Nageswara Rao for mediation. A bench led by Chief Justice of India Surya Kant, along with Justices Joymalya Bagchi and V. Mohana, initiated the process to seek an amicable resolution following arguments from both sides.
Supreme Court Intervention in the Kalyani Family Dispute
The mediation order follows a 2023 suit filed by Sugandha and Jaidev Hiremath in the Bombay High Court, which sought the specific performance of a 1994 family arrangement. During the Supreme Court proceedings, the bench heard from Senior Advocates Shyam Divan, representing the Hiremaths, and a legal team including Kapil Sibal, Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mukul Rohatgi, and C. Aryama Sundaram for the Kalyani side.
While the Kalyani side initially resisted mediation by citing failed attempts in 2018-19 and before the Pune District Court, the Supreme Court bench encouraged the parties to reconsider. Chief Justice Kant noted that, despite previous setbacks, effective communication—such as in a case he recalled involving two brothers and a dispute dating back to 1972—can lead to resolution. “This is the magic of mediation,” the Chief Justice remarked.
Status of Bombay High Court Proceedings
To facilitate the mediation process, the Supreme Court has requested that the Bombay High Court keep an application filed by Babasaheb Kalyani under Order 7 Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) in abeyance. This application, which seeks the rejection of the Hiremaths’ suit, will remain pending while the mediation efforts are underway.
Chief Justice Kant stated firmly that “court proceedings must remain in abeyance during mediation.” The bench declined a request from the Kalyani side to allow the Order 7 Rule 11 hearing to continue simultaneously, nor would they set a strict two-week deadline for the mediation’s conclusion. The court indicated, however, that if the mediation process proves unsuccessful, the High Court may be requested to decide the Order 7 Rule 11 application in a time-bound manner.
Background and Future Outlook
This development marks a shift from the position held by the Bombay High Court on May 4, 2026. At that time, the High Court had declined to refer the parties to mediation, citing the voluntary nature of the Mediation Act, 2023. The High Court had determined that because one party was unwilling and previous attempts had failed, there were no sufficient grounds to compel the process.
The parties have agreed to contact Justice L. Nageswara Rao to begin the mediation process immediately, with the matter scheduled to be posted before the Supreme Court again in two weeks. Whether this attempt will succeed where previous efforts failed remains to be seen; however, the involvement of a former Supreme Court judge signifies a renewed attempt to settle the family property disagreement out of court.
Related reading