{"id":77845,"date":"2009-08-21T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2009-08-20T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009"},"modified":"2018-10-30T00:36:31","modified_gmt":"2018-10-29T19:06:31","slug":"conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","title":{"rendered":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Punjab-Haryana High Court<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009<\/div>\n<pre>      PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH\n                   ***\n<\/pre>\n<p>             Arbitration Case Nos.108 to 100 of 2008<br \/>\n             Date of decision: August 21, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<p>                         ***<\/p>\n<p>Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd.<\/p>\n<p>                          Versus<\/p>\n<p>      M\/S Equipment Conductor Cables Limited.\n<\/p>\n<p>                          ***<\/p>\n<p>CORAM:       Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur,CJ<\/p>\n<p>                         ***<br \/>\nPresent:     Shri V.K.Jain, Sr.Advocate, with<br \/>\n             Shri Pardeep Bhandari,Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Shri Hari Om Attri, Advocate, for<br \/>\n             respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Shri Ajay Gupta, Addl: Advocate General,<br \/>\n             for the State of Haryana.\n<\/p>\n<p>                   ***<\/p>\n<p>T.S.Thakur, CJ (Oral)<\/p>\n<p>             In these petitions filed under Section 11 of the Arbitration and<\/p>\n<p>Conciliation Act, 1996, the petitioners pray for the       appointment of an<\/p>\n<p>independent arbitrator for adjudication of the disputes that have arisen<\/p>\n<p>between the parties in relation to three different purchase orders placed by<\/p>\n<p>the Transmission Corporation with respondent No.1 Company. It is not in<\/p>\n<p>dispute that in terms of Section 18 of the        Micro, Small and Medium<\/p>\n<p>Enterprises Development Act, 2006 reference to the Micro, Small and<\/p>\n<p>Medium Enterprises        Facilitation Council was made to explore the<\/p>\n<p>possibility of a settlement of the outstanding disputes by way of<\/p>\n<p>conciliation. It is also not in dispute that one of the issues that was raised<\/p>\n<p>before the said Council related to its territorial jurisdiction to entertain the<\/p>\n<p>conciliation proceedings. The said issue was it appears argued by both the<\/p>\n<p>sides and by an order dated 5.7.2006 decided in the affirmative holding<\/p>\n<p>that the Haryana, Micro &amp; Small Enterprise Facilitation Council had\n<\/p>\n<p>                    -2-         Arbitration Case Nos.108 to 100 of 2008<\/p>\n<p>the jurisdiction to entertain conciliation proceedings. Further proceedings<\/p>\n<p>before the Council could not however go on because of an interim order of<\/p>\n<p>stay passed by this Court in these proceedings on 23.07.2008. A reading of<\/p>\n<p>the order of this Court give an impression as though the Council was<\/p>\n<p>proceeding with the matter without determining the question of territorial<\/p>\n<p>jurisdiction, learned counsel for the respondent argued and in my opinion<\/p>\n<p>rightly so that the impression created was not entirely correct in asmuch as<\/p>\n<p>the Council had on 5.8.2006 after hearing arguments of both the sides<\/p>\n<p>declared that it had the jurisdiction to entertain the council proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>The interim order staying further proceedings before the Council was not<\/p>\n<p>in that view justified.\n<\/p>\n<p>             Learned counsel for the petitioner in all these petitions argued<\/p>\n<p>that the conciliation proceedings must be deemed to have failed leaving no<\/p>\n<p>option except to look for a suitable Arbitrator to adjudicate upon the<\/p>\n<p>disputes between the parties. In support of that submission he placed<\/p>\n<p>reliance upon an order passed by the Council on 8.5.2008 in which it is<\/p>\n<p>inter alia recorded that one of the parties was not agreeable to any<\/p>\n<p>reconciliation. It was submitted that since one of the parties to the disputes<\/p>\n<p>was not agreeable to any conciliation, it will be presumed that reconciliation<\/p>\n<p>had failed. I do not think so. It is true that one of the parties has shown no<\/p>\n<p>inclination to reconcile the outstanding disputes, yet it is equally true that<\/p>\n<p>the Council has not so far reported failure of the conciliation proceedings.<\/p>\n<p>On the contrary the Council had         adjourned the matter to 8.7.2009<\/p>\n<p>obviously in an attempt to make further efforts to bring about a conciliation<\/p>\n<p>between the two parties. Even according to learned counsel appearing for<\/p>\n<p>the Haryana Micro and Small Enterprise Facilitation Council-respondent<\/p>\n<p>No.2 in these petitions no failure report has been submitted by the Council<\/p>\n<p>so far and the proceedings can be resumed any time if the order passed by<\/p>\n<p>this Court against the said proceedings is vacated. That being so it may be\n<\/p>\n<p>                    -3-    Arbitration Case Nos.108 to 100 of 2008<\/p>\n<p>premature for this Court to assume that the proceedings before the Council<\/p>\n<p>have indeed failed to bring about a satisfactory situation. The proper<\/p>\n<p>course in my opinion is to give an opportunity to the Facilitation Council to<\/p>\n<p>conclude its proceedings expeditiously. Before any resort is taken to the<\/p>\n<p>provisions of Section 18 of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises<\/p>\n<p>Development Act, 2006 read with Section 11 of the              Arbitration and<\/p>\n<p>Conciliation Act, 1996 for reference of disputes for arbitration.<\/p>\n<p>             It was then argued on behalf of the respondents that even after<\/p>\n<p>the conciliation proceedings are reported to have failed, the Council may<\/p>\n<p>itself decide to act as an Arbitrator or refers the disputes for arbitration to<\/p>\n<p>any institution or centre providing alternate dispute resolution services.<\/p>\n<p>Counsel appearing for the petitioner on the other hand argued that keeping<\/p>\n<p>in view the prohibition contained in Section 80 of the         Arbitration and<\/p>\n<p>Conciliation Act, 1996, the council cannot act as a arbitrator in a case<\/p>\n<p>where it has itself conducted conciliation proceedings. This would,<\/p>\n<p>according to him, would mean that after the conciliation proceedings fail,<\/p>\n<p>the council would have no right assume the role of an arbitrator and shall<\/p>\n<p>have to make a adjudication of the disputes for arbitration to any institution<\/p>\n<p>or centre for such arbitration.\n<\/p>\n<p>             I do not for the present propose to express any final opinion as<\/p>\n<p>to the legality or legitimacy of the arbitration proceedings, if the council<\/p>\n<p>chooses to assume the role of an arbitrator. Whether or not the Council<\/p>\n<p>can decide to act as an arbitrator or refer it to an institution or centre<\/p>\n<p>providing alternate dispute resolution services is a question which the<\/p>\n<p>Council will have to answer at the appropriate stage. It is only when the<\/p>\n<p>Council makes a          report regarding the failure of the conciliation<\/p>\n<p>proceedings and decides to take up the arbitration proceedings that the<\/p>\n<p>question whether the Council can act as an arbitrator may call for<\/p>\n<p>determination. Till such time, the Council has not taken a decision in that\n<\/p>\n<p>                    -4-   Arbitration Case Nos.108 to 100 of 2008<\/p>\n<p>regard. It is premature even for this Court to express any opinion regarding<\/p>\n<p>the legality of arbitration by the council. Suffice it to say that the present<\/p>\n<p>petitions seeking appointment of a arbitrator are for the present not<\/p>\n<p>maintainable and shall have to await conclusion of the conciliation<\/p>\n<p>proceedings.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<p>            In the result, these petitions are disposed off in the following<br \/>\nterms:-\n<\/p>\n<blockquote><p>      1.            The parties shall appear before the Haryana<br \/>\n      Micro &amp; Small Enterprise Facilitation Council on 15.09.2009<br \/>\n      for further directions;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      2.            The Council shall resume to the conciliation<br \/>\n      proceedings and conclude the same expeditiously but not<br \/>\n      later than three months from 15.09.2009;\n<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<blockquote><p>      3.            The Council shall communicate to the parties, the<br \/>\n      result of the conciliation proceedings and also whether the<br \/>\n      matters in dispute, if not resolved, is being referred to<br \/>\n      arbitration if so whether the Council would itself act as an<br \/>\n      arbitrator or refer the same to any institution or centre<br \/>\n      providing alternate dispute resolution services.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n<p>            The parties shall have the liberty to seek appropriate redress<\/p>\n<p>in appropriate proceedings before the appropriate court or forum<\/p>\n<p>depending upon the decision taken by the Arbitrator. No costs.<\/p>\n<p>            All the pending applications are also disposed off.<\/p>\n<p>            A copy of the order be given dasti to the counsel for the<\/p>\n<p>petitioner, under the signatures of Special Bench Secretary.<\/p>\n<pre>August 21, 2009                                   (T.S.Thakur)\nMalik                                             Chief Justice\n            Arb.Case No. 110 of 2008.\n                ***\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>Present:   Shri V.K.Jain,Sr.Advocate, with<br \/>\n           Shri Pardeep Bhandari,Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Shri Hariom Attri,Advocate, for<br \/>\n           respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Shri Ajay Gupta, Addl: A.G.Haryana.\n<\/p>\n<p>                   ***<\/p>\n<p>           Same order as in Arbitration case No. 108 of 2008 decided on<\/p>\n<p>August 21, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<pre>August 21, 2009                                  (T.S.Thakur)\nMalik                                            Chief Justice\n            Arb.Case No. 109 of 2008.\n                ***\n\n<\/pre>\n<p>Present:   Shri V.K.Jain,Sr.Advocate, with<br \/>\n           Shri Pardeep Bhandari,Advocate.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Shri Hariom Attri,Advocate, for<br \/>\n           respondent No.1.\n<\/p>\n<p>           Shri Ajay Gupta, Addl: A.G.Haryana.\n<\/p>\n<p>                   ***<\/p>\n<p>           Same order as in Arbitration case No. 108 of 2008 decided on<\/p>\n<p>August 21, 2009.\n<\/p>\n<\/p>\n<pre>August 21, 2009                                  (T.S.Thakur)\nMalik                                            Chief Justice\n <\/pre>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Punjab-Haryana High Court Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT, CHANDIGARH *** Arbitration Case Nos.108 to 100 of 2008 Date of decision: August 21, 2009. *** Transmission Corporation of Andhra Pradesh Ltd. Versus M\/S Equipment Conductor Cables Limited. *** CORAM: Hon&#8217;ble Mr. Justice T.S.Thakur,CJ *** Present: Shri V.K.Jain, Sr.Advocate, [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,28],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-77845","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-punjab-haryana-high-court"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009\",\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\"},\"wordCount\":1212,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Punjab-Haryana High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\",\"name\":\"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009","datePublished":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009"},"wordCount":1212,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Punjab-Haryana High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009","name":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2009-08-20T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-10-29T19:06:31+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/conciliation-act-vs-unknown-on-21-august-2009#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Conciliation Act vs Unknown on 21 August, 2009"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77845","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=77845"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/77845\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=77845"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=77845"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=77845"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}