Arbitration, Conciliation and Alternate

Dispute Resolution
1. Arbitration
1.1 Introduction: Meaning, Definition, Nature and Importance

Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution where parties agree to submit their disputes
to one or more arbitrators instead of courts. It has ancient roots (e.g. in village panchayats or
merchant practices) but acquired a modern statutory form in India through the Arbitration Act of
1940 and, more comprehensively, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The 1996 Act is
based on the UNCITRAL Model Law of 1985 and its conciliation rules. The Act’s Preamble
explicitly notes that it incorporates the UNCITRAL model rules “to establish a unified legal
framework for fair and efficient settlement of disputes”. Arbitration’s importance lies in
providing a private, flexible, and speedy forum: it is generally faster than court litigation, allows
parties to choose expert decision-makers, and offers confidentiality and procedural flexibility.
Because court dockets in India are heavily backlogged, arbitration (and other ADR forms) helps
in reducing judicial burden and delivering justice more expeditiously. Globally and in India,
arbitration is often preferred in commercial and construction disputes for these reasons, and
Indian law encourages it as a liberal, pro-arbitration regime in line with international standards.

1.2 Composition and Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal

The arbitration tribunal (or panel) is constituted as agreed by the parties. Under the Act, parties
are free to choose any number of arbitrators, but typically an odd number (1 or 3) is adopted. If
there is a sole arbitrator, the parties must mutually appoint him. If there are three arbitrators, each
party appoints one, and those two select a third as chairpersonindiacode.nic.in. Section 11 of the
Act provides detailed rules: it states that arbitrators can be of any nationality (unless parties agree
otherwise)indiacode.nic.in, and if parties fail to appoint arbitrators within the prescribed time, the
courts will step in to appoint themindiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in. For example, Section 11(4)–
(5) empowers the High Court or Supreme Court to appoint an arbitrator if a party fails to do so
within 30 days or if appointed arbitrators fail to select a presiding arbitratorindiacode.nic.in.
These appointment provisions ensure that an arbitration can proceed even if one party is dilatory.

Qualifications and impartiality of arbitrators are crucial. Section 12 requires that any person
approached as a potential arbitrator must disclose in writing any past or present connections with
the parties or subject matter that might raise doubts about independenceindiacode.nic.in. Further,
an arbitrator may be challenged and removed only if justified doubts about his impartiality exist
indiacode.nic.in. This “competence-competence” principle is also embodied in Section 16: the
tribunal itself has the power to decide on its own jurisdiction, including challenges to the validity
of the arbitration agreementindiacode.nic.in. Under Section 16, the arbitration clause is
considered separable from the main contract, meaning that even if the main contract is void or
terminated, the clause can still be validindiacode.nic.in. If a party raises a jurisdictional
objection, the arbitrator may rule on it, and only after the award (if the tribunal rejects the
objection) can a party apply to the court to set aside on that basisindiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in.
Thus, arbitrators enjoy final authority on their own jurisdiction (subject to limited court review
after the fact).

Regarding subject-matter jurisdiction, not all disputes can be arbitrated. The Act (implicitly)
excludes criminal matters and some public interest issues. For instance, disputes involving non-
compoundable offences, divorce, guardianship, etc., are generally outside arbitration (as held by
courts). Civil and commercial disputes – contract breaches, property, investor or contractual
matters – are commonly referred to arbitration. In international commercial disputes, parties
often agree on an arbitration in a neutral seat (e.g. Singapore, London) or in India (making it a
domestic or international arbitration under the Act).

1.3 Format of Arbitration Agreement

The arbitration agreement is the cornerstone of any arbitration. It can be a standalone agreement
or a clause within a larger contract. Section 2(b) of the Act defines an “arbitration agreement” as
one in writing by which the parties agree to submit present or future disputes to arbitration
indiacode.nic.in. Section 7(3) further mandates that the agreement must be in writing
indiacode.nic.in. In practice, a typical format might read:

“All disputes arising out of or in connection with this contract shall be referred to arbitration in
accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The venue of arbitration shall be
[City], India, and the tribunal shall consist of [one/three] arbitrator(s) selected by the parties. The
arbitral proceedings shall be conducted in English.”

This clause should be signed by the parties. The Act allows “writing” to include an exchange of
communications (fax, email, electronic) confirming the agreementindiacode.nic.in. Key elements
include identifying the parties, specifying which disputes are covered, and detailing appointment
procedures (if agreed). An arbitration clause can be general (“all disputes”) or specific (“only
disputes under clause X”), but it must clearly signal the intent to arbitrate. For example, Section
7(1) states that a clause whereby parties agree to refer disputes to arbitration is itself an
arbitration agreementindiacode.nic.in.

A well-drafted agreement enhances certainty. Parties often specify the seat (law of which country
governs the arbitration), the applicable rules (e.g. institutional rules of a center), and procedural
modalities. As best practice, the arbitration clause should be conspicuous and precisely worded,
citing the Act (or UNCITRAL rules) and the scope of matters referred. It should expressly waive
any jurisdiction of courts to settle those covered disputes, ensuring prompt referral to arbitration
(subject to a court’s prima facie review under Section 8indiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in).

1.4 Arbitration Agreement (Definition and Validity)

Legally, an arbitration agreement “must be in writing”indiacode.nic.in and can exist either as a

clause in a contract or as a separate agreementindiacode.nic.in. Section 7(1) of the Act confirms
that both forms are validindiacode.nic.in. The Act preserves the principle of separability: even if
the main contract is void or terminated, the arbitration agreement may surviveindiacode.nic.in.
Under Section 8, if a court is seized of a dispute and finds an arbitration agreement exists, it must
refer the parties to arbitration unless it finds the agreement “null and void, inoperative or
incapable of being performed”indiacode.nic.in. Thus a valid arbitration agreement shuts the door
on court litigation for that dispute.

Certain formal requirements enhance enforceability. The 1996 Act (Sec. 7(3)) requires the
arbitration agreement to be in writingindiacode.nic.in. The Supreme Court has held that
“writing” includes any record proving agreement (letters, telegrams, exchange of emails, even
faxes)indiacode.nic.in. Importantly, a party’s request to arbitrate under a written clause can
trigger the court’s duty to stay court proceedings and refer to arbitration (subject to limited
scrutiny)indiacode.nic.in.

Arbitration agreements are typically “ad-hoc” (the parties handle the process themselves) or
“institutional” (administered by an arbitral institution). Ad-hoc clauses might simply fix a seat
and language. Institutional clauses often reference an institution (e.g. “governed by the Rules of
the Indian Council of Arbitration”). In the latter case, the institution may play a role in
appointing arbitrators or managing proceedings. Throughout, the intention is that disputes be
resolved privately, quickly, and by chosen experts rather than by a court.

1.5 Conduct of Arbitral Proceedings and Termination

Once constituted, the arbitral tribunal conducts the proceedings as per the parties’ agreement or,
in default, its own rules guided by the Act. Section 18 of the Act ensures equality of treatment:
arbitrators must allow each party full opportunity to present its case. By Section 19, the tribunal
is not strictly bound by the Code of Civil Procedure or the Evidence Act, unless the parties so
agree; this affords flexibility in procedure. The tribunal may, for example, decide on the
admissibility of evidence, apply principles of natural justice, and allow document or witness
discovery as it sees fit.

The arbitration process formally begins when one party sends a notice to arbitrate to the other
indiacode.nic.in (the Act’s wording is akin to a reference to arbitration). Section 21 provides that
unless otherwise agreed, proceedings commence on the date on which a request to arbitrate is
received by the other partyindiacode.nic.in. The tribunal then typically holds a preliminary
hearing to fix the procedure, document exchange, witness list, and timetable. Parties usually
submit statements of claim and defense, along with supporting documents. Section 23 directs
that any claim must be made in writing with the general statement of the subject matter, and any
defense similarlyindiacode.nic.in. Hearings can be oral or by documents, at times spread over
multiple sessions. The parties and arbitrators often meet at regular intervals until dispute is fully
heard.

The tribunal has certain powers to ensure proceedings run smoothly. Under Section 17, it can
order interim measures (e.g. preserving assets, maintaining status quo) if requested. If a party
fails to appear, Section 25 allows the tribunal to proceed ex parte (in that party’s absence) if
proper notice was given. Upon receiving all arguments and evidence, the tribunal typically gives
each side an opportunity to make a final closing statement. After that, it deliberates and prepares
the award.
Proceedings may end in one of several ways. The usual termination is by the making of a final
arbitral award on the merits. Section 32(1) confirms that proceedings terminate when the final
award is madeindiacode.nic.in. However, certain events can also terminate the proceedings
before a merits award: for instance, if the claimant withdraws its claim (and the tribunal finds no
prejudice to the respondent)indiacode.nic.in, if the parties mutually agree to terminate, or if the
tribunal deems that continuation is unnecessary or impossible (Section 32(2)). In such cases the
tribunal issues an order of terminationindiacode.nic.in. At that point, the tribunal’s mandate ends
(subject to corrections or additional awards under Sections 33–34)indiacode.nic.in.

The 1996 Act also encourages settlement. Section 30 expressly empowers the tribunal to
facilitate a settlement and even record the settlement agreement as an “award on agreed terms” if
parties so requestindiacode.nic.in. Any amicable settlement formulated by the arbitrators (or
recorded by them) is treated as an arbitration award under Section 30 and has the same legal
statusindiacode.nic.in. This integrates conciliation within arbitration, preserving the consensual
resolution even in arbitral proceedings.

1.6 Arbitral Award

The arbitral award is the formal decision on the dispute. Section 31 of the Act prescribes its
essential form and contentindiacode.nic.in. An award must be in writing and signed by all
arbitrators (or a majority, if one or more arbitrator has validly omitted to sign – in which case the
reason must be stated)indiacode.nic.in. The award must state its date and the place of arbitration
(the legal “seat” of arbitration)indiacode.nic.in. It must also state the reasons for the decision,
unless the parties have agreed that no reasons will be given, or if it is a purely agreed settlement
(which per Section 30 requires no reasons)indiacode.nic.in. Once the award is signed, copies
must be delivered to each party (Section 31(5))indiacode.nic.in.

The content of the award is crucial: it must dispose of all submitted claims (and any
counterclaims). The tribunal can include interest in any money award, at a reasonable rate, from
the date of cause of action until payment (Section 31(7))indiacode.nic.in. If the tribunal omits a
claim, Section 33 allows the parties to request an “additional award” covering omitted claims
within 30 days of the awardindiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in. Corrections of clerical errors or
clarifications of the award can similarly be made on request or suo moto under Section 33
indiacode.nic.in.

Time limits for the award are governed by Section 29A (as amended). For domestic arbitrations,
the arbitral award must now be rendered within 12 months from the completion of pleadings
indiacode.nic.in. The parties may by agreement extend this by up to an additional six months
(making 18 months total)indiacode.nic.in. If the tribunal fails to render an award within the
prescribed period (including any extension), its mandate terminatesindiacode.nic.in. This strict
timeline (adopted in the 2015 Amendment) was intended to prevent interminable arbitrations and
encourage timely awards.

In summary, once arbitrators receive the final submissions and are convinced all evidence is
heard, they issue the written award, which is final unless successfully challenged.
1.7 Finality and Enforcement of Arbitral Award

Under Section 35 of the Act, an arbitral award (once made and subject to the specific provisions
of Part I) is “final and binding” on the partiesindiacode.nic.in. This principle of finality means
there is no ordinary appeal on the merits of the award. The only recourse is by way of an
application to set aside (undermine) the award under Section 34, on narrowly defined grounds
(such as invalid agreement, procedural unfairness, arbitrability, or public policy)indiacode.nic.in.
Notably, once the opportunity to challenge the award in court has passed, the award can be
enforced as a decree of the court.

Section 36 provides that when the period for setting aside the award has expired, the award is
enforced in accordance with the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, “in the same manner as if it were
a decree of the court”indiacode.nic.in. Thus, a domestic arbitration award can be filed in court
like a judgment: it can be executed against assets, attachment can be sought, etc. Even if a party
has filed a challenge under Section 34, Section 36 clarifies that the filing of the challenge itself
does not automatically stay enforcement; a separate order of court is required to stay the award
indiacode.nic.in. In practice, this ensures that winning parties can move ahead with execution if
the courts do not grant a stay.

For example, after the statutory period for challenge lapses, the award is deemed a decree by
Section 36indiacode.nic.in. If a party fails to comply, the other can apply under Section 36(1) to
the court for enforcement. The court then proceeds exactly as it would for any civil decree
(issuing attachment and sale of property if needed). The only appeal after this enforcement step
is to the Supreme Court, since no second appeal is allowed from orders under Section 37
indiacode.nic.in.

1.8 Appeal Against Arbitral Award

One of the hallmarks of arbitration is the limited right of appeal. Section 37 of the Act specifies a
narrow set of interlocutory orders that can be appealed to a higher courtindiacode.nic.in. For
instance, if a court under Section 8 (refusal to refer to arbitration) or Section 9 (interim measure)
makes an order, that order can be appealedindiacode.nic.in. Likewise, an order under Section 16
or 17 by the arbitral tribunal (deciding a jurisdictional plea or interim measure) is appealable
indiacode.nic.in. Crucially, Section 37 explicitly states that no appeal lies from any other orders,
and in particular it does not create an appeal against the award itselfindiacode.nic.in. In practice,
therefore, a party dissatisfied with the merits of an award has only the route of Section 34
(setting aside) – there is no “second chance” via appeal on substantive grounds.

This principle has been confirmed by courts. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that
arbitration is designed to be final and that allowing appeals on merits would defeat the purpose
of arbitration. Only when a statutory ground is met (e.g. the award is in conflict with public
policy as defined by the Act) can a party approach courtindiacode.nic.in. Notably, the
Amendments (2015) clarified that appeals lie only as per Section 37’s enumerated categories
(now including certain interim orders) and no appeal lies on the award itselfindiacode.nic.in. By
restricting appeals, the Act emphasizes speedy finality in arbitration, unlike normal civil
litigation where parties can avail multiple appeals.
1.9 Role of Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA)

The Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA) is a premier institution for administering arbitration (as
well as conciliation and mediation) in India. Established in 1965 under Government of India
auspices, ICA began as a society promoted by Commerce Ministry and leading Chambers of
Commerceviamediationcentre.org. Over time it gained autonomy and became a key non-profit
organization to promote commercial arbitrationviamediationcentre.org. Its headquarters are in
New Delhi, with branches across India.

ICA’s main function is to administer arbitrations under its institutional rules. It maintains a panel
of experienced arbitrators (lawyers, judges, retired judges, engineers, etc.) from which arbitrators
can be appointed. If parties’ agreement refers disputes to “Indian Council of Arbitration,” ICA
acts as the appointing authority and case manager. ICA organizes hearings, keeps records, and
ensures that arbitrations proceed smoothly. According to ICA’s own description, it handles over
200 arbitrations (domestic and international) annuallyviamediationcentre.org, making it a central
ADR body in the region. It also provides conciliation and mediation services under its aegis.

Beyond case administration, ICA plays an educational and promotional role. It conducts training
programs and seminars on arbitration and ADRviamediationcentre.org. It has drafted model
clauses and rules (for domestic arbitration) and helps businesses incorporate arbitration in
contracts. ICA also monitors trends and suggests improvements in arbitration law and practice
viamediationcentre.org. Thus, ICA serves as an enabling institution: parties benefit from its
arbitration infrastructure, and India benefits from its efforts to disseminate ADR knowledge.

In summary, the ICA exemplifies an institutional arbitration centre as envisaged in the

Arbitration Act. Parties can rely on its neutrality and expertise. It complements legal reforms by
offering a ready-made framework for domestic arbitrations, and many commercial entities
include a clause referring disputes to ICA arbitration. Its existence demonstrates India’s
commitment to an institutionalized ADR system.

2. Foreign Arbitral Awards

2.1 Enforcement of Foreign (New York Convention) Awards

“Foreign awards” under Part II of the Act generally means awards covered by the 1958 New
York Convention. Section 44 defines a foreign award as one made in a country which is a party
to the Convention, under an arbitration agreement that is in writingindiacode.nic.in. India
acceded to the New York Convention in 1960, so awards made after that date in contracting
states are eligible for enforcement. Section 45 of the Act requires that if a court in India is seized
of a matter covered by such an arbitration agreement, it must refer the parties to arbitration
(similar to Section 8 in Part I)indiacode.nic.in. Once an award has been issued abroad, Section
46 clarifies that it is binding on the parties (and can be used as a defence or set-off in Indian
proceedings)indiacode.nic.in.

To enforce a foreign award in India, one must apply to the appropriate Indian court with the
following (per Section 47)indiacode.nic.in: (a) the original award (or a certified copy)
authenticated according to the law of the country where it was made,
(b) the arbitration agreement or certified copy, and
(c) evidence proving that the award is indeed a foreign award.
If these documents are not in English, a certified translation must also be produced
indiacode.nic.in. Once submitted, the court proceeds with enforcement under Section 48.

Section 48 sets out narrow grounds on which enforcement may be refusedindiacode.nic.in. A

foreign award can only be refused if the party against whom it is invoked proves one of the
enumerated defects. These include incapacity of a party, invalidity of the agreement, lack of
notice or opportunity to present the case, or that the award dealt with issues beyond the
submissionindiacode.nic.in. For example, if the losing party was not properly notified of the
arbitration or award, enforcement can be deniedindiacode.nic.in. Also, if the composition of the
arbitral tribunal was not in accordance with the parties’ agreement or the law of the place of
arbitration, refusal is allowedindiacode.nic.in. Importantly, enforcement may be refused if the
award has not yet become binding or has been set aside in the country of originindiacode.nic.in.

Even stricter are the public policy grounds. Under Section 48(2), if the subject matter is not
arbitrable under Indian law or enforcement would contravene public policy, the court may refuse
enforcementindiacode.nic.in. India’s conception of public policy (defined by judicial gloss)
limits this to fundamental violations such as fraud, corruption, or awards violating Indian law or
moralityindiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in. Notably, Indian courts have shown reluctance to refuse
enforcement on vague policy grounds, in line with the pro-enforcement spirit of the New York
Convention.

If no ground for refusal is established, Section 49 declares that an award is enforceable as if it

were a court decree of that enforcing courtindiacode.nic.in. One then proceeds under the Civil
Procedure Code to execute the award. Thus, a New York Convention award, once recognized,
has the same force as a domestic judgment. The Act also provides (Section 50) for an appeal
from a refusal or grant of enforcement to the appropriate High Court, and (Section 51) that
domestic rights under any bilateral treaties remain unaffected.

Indian case law has underscored these points. In Booz Allen Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance
Ltd. (2011), the Supreme Court held that a New York award is enforceable in India even if it was
seated outside Indiaindiacode.nic.in, affirming a broad view of enforceability. Likewise, in
Enercon (India) Ltd. v. Enercon GMBH (2014), the Court discouraged use of public policy
grounds to deny enforcement, applying a very narrow test (fraud, corruption, breach of
fundamental policy)indiacode.nic.in.

2.2 Enforcement of Foreign Awards under the Geneva Convention

India also enforces certain awards under the (earlier) Geneva Convention of 1927, mainly
through Chapter II of Part II of the Act. Section 53 defines “foreign award” for these purposes
(awards pursuant to conventions in effect in 1925, like the Geneva Convention on international
business disputes)indiacode.nic.in. Sections 54–57 establish similar procedures and grounds. A
judicial authority in India must refer to arbitration if a Geneva-type agreement exists (Section 54)
indiacode.nic.in. A foreign Geneva award that would be enforceable under its Chapter is binding
in India by Section 55. The evidence requirements (Section 56) and conditions for enforcement
(Section 57) echo those for New York awards: the tribunal’s jurisdiction, arbitrability of the
subject, tribunal procedure compliance, award finality, and public policy must be satisfied
indiacode.nic.in. In practice, however, since India is a party to the New York Convention, almost
all modern foreign awards fall under the New York framework. Geneva Convention awards are
largely of historical interest now.

In both cases, once an award (New York or Geneva) is deemed enforceable, it is treated as a
decree (Section 49 for New York, Section 55(2) for Geneva) and executed like any court order.
The courts have favored enforcement: for example, in Govind Rubber Ltd. v. P.R. Industries
(2017), the Delhi High Court reinforced that unless one of the precise statutory exceptions is
proved, the foreign award must be enforced. Thus, foreign arbitration has legal teeth in India,
giving credibility to India as an arbitration-friendly seat.

3. Conciliation
3.1 Commencement of Proceedings

Conciliation is an ADR process provided for in Part III of the Act, distinct from arbitration. It is
voluntary and non-binding until a settlement is reached. Under Section 62, any party may initiate
conciliation by sending a written invitation to conciliate to the other party, briefly identifying the
disputeindiacode.nic.in. The conciliation proceeding officially begins when the other party
accepts this invitation in writingindiacode.nic.in. If the other party rejects or fails to respond
within the specified time (usually 30 days), no conciliation takes placeindiacode.nic.in. Thus,
both consent and mutual willingness are prerequisites. No court or tribunal interference is needed
to start conciliation, unlike arbitration where a reference triggers proceedings. Any settlement in
conciliation is consensual and recorded by the conciliator.

Conciliation can also be court-referred under Section 8A and 8B of the Act (as inserted by the
2015 amendments) if the court sees settlement potential in a matter under Sections 9, 11, 34 or
37 of the Act. In such cases, the court may stay proceedings and refer the dispute to conciliation
(or mediation) with party consentindiacode.nic.inindiacode.nic.in. But typically, parties
voluntarily choose conciliation as a preliminary step or in parallel to negotiations. Section 62 is
silent on subject-matter: any civil or commercial dispute not already in court can potentially be
conciliated.

3.2 Appointment and Role of Conciliators

Under Section 63, a conciliation is usually conducted by a sole conciliator, unless the parties
agree to have two or threeindiacode.nic.in. If more than one is appointed, they should normally
act jointly. The process for appointing conciliators is flexible. Section 64 provides that if there is
one conciliator, the parties jointly agree on a name; for two conciliators, each party appoints one;
for three, each party appoints one and the two party-appointed conciliators mutually agree on the
presiding conciliatorindiacode.nic.in. Alternatively, the parties may jointly request an arbitral
institution or other neutral body to propose or appoint conciliatorsindiacode.nic.in. For example,
parties might ask the Indian Council of Arbitration or a High Court mediation centre to suggest
suitable neutrals. The institutional route often yields a panel of eminent persons with relevant
expertise.

Conciliators are expected to be independent and impartial. Though the Act’s conciliation part
does not have a detailed disclosure clause like arbitration does, the general duty of fairness
applies. A conciliator’s role is facilitative: to assist parties in reaching a voluntary settlement.
Section 67 describes this role clearly: the conciliator “shall assist the parties in an independent
and impartial manner in their attempt to reach an amicable settlement”indiacode.nic.in. In
practice, the conciliator may hold joint or separate meetings with the parties, help clarify issues,
suggest options for compromise, and guide negotiations. Unlike an arbitrator, a conciliator does
not decide or impose a solution; he may propose or craft possible settlements, but all solutions
require party approval. The conciliator should maintain confidentiality and work with objectivity
and a view to justiceindiacode.nic.in. Essentially, the conciliator acts as a trusted intermediary,
using his experience to bridge differences.

3.3 Submission of Statement to Conciliators

To facilitate informed negotiation, Section 65 allows the conciliator to request written statements
from each party. Initially, the conciliator may ask for a brief statement outlining the nature of the
dispute and issues involved, which each party also shares with the otherindiacode.nic.in.
Subsequently, the conciliator may ask for a more detailed position statement containing facts,
legal contentions, documents, and supporting evidenceindiacode.nic.in. Each party must provide
this information to the conciliator and copy it to the opposite side. These statements help the
conciliator understand the dispute’s facts, the parties’ interests, and points of conflict.
Importantly, any information disclosed in these statements is treated confidentially in the
conciliation process (and cannot be used against a party later) under Section 75indiacode.nic.in.
This confidentiality encourages openness. The conciliation procedure is deliberately informal, so
the written statements need not follow strict legal format; they simply inform the conciliator of
each side’s perspective and factual basis.

3.4 Communication between Conciliator and Parties

Section 69 of the Act expressly permits the conciliator to communicate with the parties jointly or
individuallyindiacode.nic.in. The conciliator can invite parties to meetings or talk to them
separately, which is often done to understand each party’s true interests without the other
present. This flexibility distinguishes conciliation (and mediation) from typical court hearings.
Throughout the process, the conciliator maintains confidentiality, and no party is bound by
anything said unless a final agreement is reached. The Act even provides that communications
made during conciliation, including any settlement proposals, are inadmissible as evidence in
subsequent court or arbitration proceedings (Section 75)indiacode.nic.in. This reinforces trust
that parties can negotiate freely without prejudice. By allowing open dialogue and shuttle
diplomacy, the conciliator helps the parties overcome impasse and explore creative solutions.

3.5 Settlement Agreement

If conciliation succeeds, the parties draw up a written settlement agreement. Section 73 provides
that when the conciliator perceives that the parties can reach a deal, he formulates terms of
settlement and submits them for commentindiacode.nic.in. After any revisions, the parties
finalize and sign the agreementindiacode.nic.in. Section 74 makes it very clear that such a
settlement agreement has the same legal status as an “arbitral award on agreed terms” under
Section 30: it is final and binding on the parties and their successorsindiacode.nic.in. In effect,
the settlement can be enforced like an arbitration award (and hence like a court decree) once
signed. The conciliator formally authenticates the settlement document and provides copies to
the partiesindiacode.nic.in. Because of this, parties know that an amicable conciliation does not
require going back to court to make the agreement binding – it is immediately effective. If one
party breaches it later, the other can file it in court as an arbitral award and execute it
indiacode.nic.in.

3.6 Termination of Conciliation Proceedings

Conciliation can terminate either by successful settlement or by breakdown of negotiations.

Section 76 lists four modes of termination: (a) by signing of the settlement agreement, (b) by a
written declaration of the conciliator (after consulting the parties) that further efforts are futile,
(c) by a written declaration of the parties jointly to terminate, or (d) by a written declaration by a
party and the conciliator to that effectindiacode.nic.in. Once conciliation ends, whether with or
without agreement, the parties are free to pursue other remedies. However, during conciliation,
Section 77 restrains parties from initiating or continuing litigation or arbitration on the same
dispute (except to protect legal rights)indiacode.nic.in. This ensures parties concentrate on
settlement without parallel court action.

If conciliation fails (no agreement is reached), the conciliator will issue a final report or
declaration to that effect. The parties can then either go to arbitration (if an arbitration clause
exists) or to court litigation. In practice, many business contracts include both arbitration and
conciliation clauses – so parties attempt conciliation first (either voluntarily or by court referral)
and if that fails, they move to arbitration as a backup. In this way, conciliation often serves as a
quick, friendly first step to avoid costly adjudication.

4. Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) System

4.1 Development, Meaning, Objectives and Advantages

Alternate Dispute Resolution (ADR) encompasses various mechanisms – arbitration,

conciliation, mediation, negotiation, and others – to resolve disputes without resorting to
conventional litigation. ADR developed globally in the late 20th century as courts became
overburdened and parties sought faster, less adversarial processes. In India, the idea gained
traction post-independence; by the 1980s and 1990s, legislative changes (CPC amendments,
arbitration reform) embraced ADR. The objectives of ADR are manifold: to expedite dispute
resolution, reduce judicial backlog, lower costs, preserve business relationships, and provide
party autonomy over process. ADR often promotes creative, mutually beneficial outcomes
unattainable in win-lose litigation.
The advantages of ADR are widely recognized. ADR methods are generally faster than court
cases, which may drag on for years. They allow flexible procedures tailored to the parties’ needs.
For example, parties can choose neutral experts as arbitrators or mediators. Many ADR
proceedings are confidential, protecting trade secrets and reputations, unlike public court records.
ADR is often less formal, reducing legal technicalities and promoting direct communication.
Additionally, ADR may be more cost-effective since it saves lengthy court fees and multiple
appeals. Preservation of relationships is a key benefit: in mediation and conciliation, parties work
cooperatively on a solution, rather than adversarially. Collectively, these features aim at “fair and
efficient settlement” of disputes, as noted in the Act’s preamble.

4.2 Section 89 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC)

The Code of Civil Procedure was amended in 2002 (effective 2003) to include Section 89, which
mandates courts to encourage out-of-court settlement before adjudication. Section 89 empowers
or even obligates courts to refer a civil suit to arbitration, conciliation, mediation or Lok Adalat if
it appears that such alternative process would lead to settlementindiacode.nic.in. In practice, if
the parties have an existing ADR agreement, Order 10 Rule 1A allows the court to stay its
proceedings. Even absent a prior agreement, a judge can suggest ADR if he believes it might
resolve all or part of the dispute. The Supreme Court in Salem Advocate Bar Association v.
Union of India (2005) interpreted Section 89 broadly, urging mandatory ADR in appropriate
cases to reduce litigation. Thus, Section 89 represents a policy of last resort: before lengthy trial,
the court must try to divert suitable cases to ADR. Many courts now routinely ask parties at the
first hearing whether they have attempted or will attempt settlement via ADR, and often list
cases in court-annexed mediation/conciliation cells or Lok Adalats.

4.3 Types of ADR Systems

ADR systems in India, beyond arbitration and conciliation, include:

 Mediation and Conciliation: Mediation involves a neutral facilitator (mediator) helping

parties reach a negotiated settlement. Conciliation is similar but may allow the neutral to
be a bit more proactive in proposing solutions. Both emphasize voluntary, confidential
negotiation. (See chapters 3 and 5 for details.)
 Fast-Track Arbitration: Introduced by Amendment (1996), this is a streamlined
arbitration process for certain contracts. It generally involves a sole arbitrator, shorter
timelines (award within 6 months, no extensions except by special consent), and a fast-
track Tribunal. Fast-track arbitration is rarely used in practice but exemplifies ADR
speed.
 Final-Offer Arbitration (Baseball Arbitration): Under this system, each party submits
a final monetary offer, and the arbitrator picks one in entirety. This can incentivize
realistic demands. The Arbitration Act permits parties to agree to any procedure,
including this, though it is not commonly adopted in India.
 Negotiation: The simplest form of ADR, where parties (perhaps with their lawyers)
directly negotiate a settlement. No third-party involvement. It relies on parties’
willingness to compromise. Formal rules do not govern it.
  Mini-Trial: A hybrid ADR where each party presents a summarized case before a
neutral (often senior manager or retired judge) who then advises on settlement. Not
codified in India but occasionally used in corporate contexts.
 Judicial Settlement (Marital and Family Settlements): Some courts actively engage in
settlement efforts; family courts often require parties to attempt counseling and
negotiation. Judges may assume a conciliatory role especially in matrimonial or
maintenance cases, guiding parties toward an agreement.
 Multi-Door Court House: A concept (endorsed by the Supreme Court’s MCPC) where a
single venue (like a court building) offers multiple ADR processes – mediation,
conciliation, etc. The aim is to give disputants various “doors” to exit litigation. India’s
Supreme Court and High Courts have set up such ADR centres to facilitate this idea.
 Online Dispute Resolution (ODR): With technology, especially post-2020, India has
seen the rise of ODR platforms (e.g. for consumer disputes, e-commerce). These use
video conferencing and digital mediation tools to resolve disputes without physical
meetings. The Mediation Act 2023 explicitly encourages online and technology-based
mediation for cost-effectivenesslegal.economictimes.indiatimes.com.
 Family Settlement/Conciliation: In family disputes (divorce, inheritance, maintenance),
statutory provisions often require attempted settlement or counselling (e.g. under Family
Courts Act or Hindu Marriage Act). Family courts incorporate conciliation officers to
mediate between spouses or family members, reflecting ADR principles in social
disputes.

Each ADR type has its own procedures but shares common benefits: party control, speed, and
flexibility. Institutions like Lok Adalats (statutory ADR bodies) and Mediation Centres (court or
private-run) further diversify ADR access. In sum, the ADR system in India is a spectrum
ranging from formal arbitration to informal negotiation, all aimed at relieving courts and
resolving disputes amicably.

5. Mediation
5.1 Meaning, Definition and Scope

Mediation is a facilitative ADR process where a neutral third party (the mediator) helps disputing
parties communicate and negotiate a settlement. Unlike arbitration or conciliation under the Act,
mediation in India has been evolving and was codified by the recent Mediation Act, 2023. The
Act defines mediation as a process where parties, with a mediator’s assistance, attempt to
amicably resolve their civil or commercial disputes. Mediation is generally non-binding; any
settlement reached becomes binding only when put into writing and agreed by the parties. It
emphasizes self-determination: parties craft their own solution rather than having it imposed.
The scope of mediation is broad – contractual, commercial, family, consumer, and even some
civil disputes – subject to statutory exclusions (e.g. serious criminal matters)
legal.economictimes.indiatimes.com. Mediation can occur pre-litigation (often mandatory in
major commercial cases now) or after a suit is filed (court-referred mediation under Section 89
or special rules).
The objectives of mediation align with ADR goals: to resolve disputes faster, with less cost and
stress, while maintaining relationships. Post-2015, India strengthened mediation’s role. For
instance, under the Commercial Courts Act (2015), parties in suits filed in commercial courts
must attempt mediation before proceeding. Furthermore, courts have set up Mediation Centres
(e.g. Delhi Mediation Centre, Bombay High Court Mediation) under guidelines of the Supreme
Court’s Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC). The newly enacted Mediation
Act 2023 goes further: it requires mandatory mediation in many civil/commercial disputes before
litigationlegal.economictimes.indiatimes.com, unless the dispute falls in an excluded category. In
effect, India now treats mediation as an integral first step in dispute resolution, reflecting its large
scope and importance.

5.2 Role of the Mediator

The mediator’s role is to facilitate, not adjudicate. A mediator must remain neutral and not
advocate for either side. He assists parties to clarify issues, communicate effectively, and explore
settlement options. Mediators manage the process, sometimes meeting joint sessions and
sometimes conducting separate “caucuses” with each party to understand their interests
confidentially. Unlike a conciliator under the Act, a mediator often follows a more structured
process (introductory session, issue identification, negotiation, closure) and may have a formal
code of conduct (for example, MCPC’s Mediation Manual). Mediators guide parties but do not
suggest solutions unless authorized – they allow parties to propose solutions, offer reality-testing
advice (“What would a court decide?”), and sometimes propose settlement terms when stuck. All
communications in mediation are confidential, and mediators must safeguard confidentiality. The
2023 Act also imposes duties: for instance, mediators must disclose any potential conflicts (like
in arbitration), and are immune from liability for anything done in good faith during the
mediation. Essentially, the mediator is a catalyst for settlement, helping combat entrenched
positions and emotional barriers.

5.3 Composition and Working of Mediation Centres

Mediation can be ad hoc or institutional. Many courts and institutions have established mediation
centres. For example, the Supreme Court’s Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee
(MCPC) trains mediators and issues a roster of trained neutrals. Several High Courts have
permanent mediation centres (e.g. Delhi, Bombay, Kerala) that handle court-referred as well as
pre-litigation mediations. These centres maintain panels of accredited mediators (senior
advocates, retired judges, subject-matter experts). They provide an administrative framework:
case registration, room scheduling, and case management. Typically, a mediation centre has
multiple meeting rooms to allow confidential caucus sessions. Cases may be referred by courts,
or parties may choose to go there voluntarily (especially if indicated by a court notice). In
addition, international institutions are emerging: e.g. the India International Mediation Centre
(under NANIArb) opened in 2023 to handle cross-border commercial mediations.

Working of a mediation centre is procedural: once a dispute is registered, an intake process

collects briefs from parties. The centre then helps parties select a mediator from their panel (or
parties may suggest one). The mediator may have a preliminary conference to explain the rules
(these are often not formal and resemble ground rules like confidentiality and frankness).
Sessions are scheduled, often intensive (full-day or multi-day). Parties arrive with their counsel
and any required documents. The mediator leads joint discussions, encourages direct dialogue,
and explores settlement ideas. If settlement is reached, the mediator (or centre administrator)
assists in drafting a settlement agreement. If not, parties leave free to pursue other remedies.

The 2023 Act additionally contemplates structured features for mediations. It requires courts to
refer cases to mediation, encourages use of technology (online mediation), and sets up a
regulator to certify and maintain a roster of mediatorslegal.economictimes.indiatimes.com.
Media reports note that Section 6 of the Act mandates a body for registration of mediators, and
promotes online and community mediationlegal.economictimes.indiatimes.com. Thus, the
institutional infrastructure for mediation is being strengthened.

6. Lok Adalat
6.1 Meaning, Object and Advantages

A Lok Adalat (People’s Court) is a statutory ADR forum established under the Legal Services
Authorities Act, 1987. It aims to provide free and expeditious justice, especially to the
marginalized, by amicable settlement. Lok Adalats are constituted at district and taluk levels by
state legal services authorities (and at the Supreme Court and High Court levels by the Central
and State Legal Services Authorities). Typically, Lok Adalats are convened periodically where
parties present minor disputes before a panel usually headed by a retired judge or senior lawyer,
with other members. The atmosphere is informal, almost akin to a friendly meeting.

The object of Lok Adalats is to reduce court pendency and give litigants quick resolution. They
handle civil cases (including matrimonial, land, housing, bank recovery, cheque bounce claims)
and compoundable criminal cases. Cases pending in courts or pre-litigation matters (by mutual
consent) can be referred. Because proceedings are conciliatory, parties control the outcome; if
they reach compromise, the Lok Adalat passes an award reflecting the terms. Advantages
include: proceedings are totally free of court fees (Section 22A LSA), parties often attend
without lawyers, and enforcement is swift. Many unrepresented or poor parties especially
benefit.

Importantly, Lok Adalat awards are final. Section 21(2) of the Legal Services Authorities Act
provides that “every award made by a Lok Adalat shall be final and binding on all the parties…
and no appeal shall lie to any court”indiacode.nic.in. In effect, a Lok Adalat award has the same
force as a civil court decree. This finality encourages parties to settle, knowing they cannot later
challenge the outcome. The awards are usually just short dictates (unless parties want more
detail), but they are treated as judgments. Because of their ease and binding nature, Lok Adalats
are particularly advantageous for non-technical disputes: a survey often finds that thousands of
cases (sometimes millions annually nationwide) are disposed at Lok Adalats across India. They
are a key part of the legal aid mechanism, providing justice to those who might otherwise
languish in regular courts.

6.2 Relevancy of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (LSA Act) is the enabling statute for Lok Adalats.
Chapter V of the Act lays down the framework. Under Section 19, state authorities organize Lok
Adalats to settle casesindiacode.nic.in. Sections 20–22 outline the powers and procedures of Lok
Adalats. Notably, Section 22 empowers a Lok Adalat with the same powers as a civil court under
the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) for summoning witnesses, taking evidence on affidavits, etc.
indiacode.nic.in. This means although proceedings are informal, Lok Adalat can summon parties
and documents to facilitate settlement.

Section 21(2) (cited above) underlines finality and non-appeal ability of awardsindiacode.nic.in.
Section 21(1) also states that every pending case or matter referred to Lok Adalat is deemed to
have been disposed of when an award is passed. Furthermore, Section 22C creates “Permanent
Lok Adalats” for public utility services, which can decide cases on merits if parties fail to settle
(but ordinary Lok Adalats only settle by consent).

In practice, the LSA Act’s mandate means that the proceeds of a Lok Adalat have full legal
effect. For example, if a Lok Adalat awards a money sum, the losing party must pay as if under a
court decree. If not paid, the winning party can execute the award. Thus, the Act not only
encourages settlement but ensures enforceability. For advocates and students, the LSA Act is
thus central to understanding Lok Adalats: it legitimizes this ADR forum and spells out its
powerful finalityindiacode.nic.in.

6.3 Awards by Lok Adalat and Execution

As noted, any award passed by a Lok Adalat is final and binding on the partiesindiacode.nic.in.
Once signed by the panel, it cannot be appealed. Under Section 21, the award is deemed to be a
decree of a civil court. In practical terms, this means execution follows the usual CPC
procedures: the winning party can file the award in the civil court for enforcement if the other
side does not comply.

One important consequence is that the usual forms of procedure do not apply: Lok Adalat awards
may not contain detailed reasoning or formal findings. The Supreme Court in Hira Business v.
Preeti (2021) observed that an award need only record the settlement terms and is nevertheless
valid as a decree, even if it lacks certain formalities (like signatures of lawyers)indiacode.nic.in.
Parties accept this finality as part of the bargain of settlement.

Execution of a Lok Adalat award is therefore straightforward: it is done under Order 21 CPC like
any other decree. Because there is no appeal, there is little scope for delay. The only remedies
post-award are in cases of fraud or coercion, but even then the appropriate remedy is very limited
(e.g. a writ petition). In effect, once the award is passed, litigation on that dispute ends. This
legal power underscores the utility of Lok Adalat: for small claims especially, parties often
willingly settle knowing they get a binding decision with no further contest.

7. Law Visits: Observations and Reflections

Practical exposure through law visits helps students see legal principles in action. The following
are illustrative descriptions of typical law visits and reflections, which one might record in a
practical file:

7.1 Mandoli Prison Complex, Delhi

During the visit to Mandoli Jail (a large prison complex in Delhi), students observed the physical
conditions and the administration of justice within a correctional setting. Mandoli houses
thousands of inmates, and we noted overcrowded cells with bunk beds and limited personal
space. The prison authorities explained the classification of inmates (undertrial or convicted,
male or female sections) and showed us the barrack layouts. We learned about legal aid clinics
inside the prison: members of legal aid societies visit inmates to advise them on their rights and
upcoming court hearings. The prison school and vocational training units (such as tailoring or
carpentry workshops) were also shown, indicating efforts at rehabilitation.

Reflecting on this visit, we realized the importance of prisoners’ legal rights (Article 21
guarantees life and personal liberty to prisoners too) and how ADR concepts can apply even
here. For example, the prison administration uses internal grievance committees which mediate
minor disputes among inmates peacefully. The environment highlighted the disparity between
judicial pronouncements and on-ground realities: many inmates awaited trial for long,
underscoring the need for speedy justice. The visit impressed upon us the human aspects of law:
empathy and the lawyer’s role in ensuring legal assistance reaches the marginalized, even behind
bars.

(No specific citation for this narrative content.)

7.2 New Parliament House, Delhi

Visiting the (new) Parliament House gave insight into the legislative process behind laws like the
Arbitration Act or the Mediation Act. We toured the Lok Sabha and Rajya Sabha chambers,
noting where bills are debated and passed. It was striking to see the mace and the layout of
seating. Visiting the Parliament Library and Committee rooms, we learned how bills (e.g. the
Mediation Bill, 2023) are discussed clause-by-clause in committees before being brought to the
floor. The guide explained how amendments to the Arbitration Act are made through Parliament
sessions.

In reflection, the visit connected ADR theory with policy-making. We appreciated how lawyers
and experts often give inputs (via committees) on technical Acts. The grandeur of the building
contrasted with the practical debates on improving justice delivery, reminding us that law
evolves through democratic processes. Seeing the Parliament emphasized that all dispute
resolution laws – arbitration, conciliation, consumer forums – ultimately stem from legislative
action.

7.3 Lokayukta Office, Delhi

At the Delhi Lokayukta’s office, we observed an anti-corruption grievance redressal mechanism.
Staff explained that citizens can file complaints against public officials or ministers for
malfeasance. The Lokayukta staff (some of whom are retired judges) investigate cases or oversee
Lokayukta hearings. The office had posters about good governance and a help desk for citizens.

Though not a traditional ADR forum, the Lokayukta exemplifies an alternate path to justice in
administrative matters. We noted that Lokayukta hearings (if any scheduled) follow a quasi-
judicial process but also encourage settlement of certain complaints (for example, through Lok
Adalats specially held for revenue disputes). Our reflection was that the existence of Lokayuktas
(in many states) adds another layer of accountability, which can resolve disputes outside regular
courts, akin to ADR’s goals. It was also a reminder of various statutory bodies complementing
courts.

(No direct citation needed for this observational part.)

7.4 Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Delhi

The CAT is a specialized tribunal for public service disputes (Article 323A). On visiting, we saw
the Main Registry and a courtroom where hearings are conducted. The tribunal hears cases like
service petitions of government employees (promotions, transfers, disciplinary matters). We
observed a session where lawyers for a government officer and a government department were
making oral arguments before a bench of two members (one judicial, one administrative). The
atmosphere was formal but less crowded than a normal court.

This visit illustrated the idea of “specialized adjudication” as part of the justice system. While
CAT’s decisions are judicial (not ADR settlements), its existence is a kind of dispute resolution
offloading – employees need not approach High Courts first, but can go to CAT. Sometimes
CAT even encourages out-of-court settlement. Reflecting on CAT, we understood how ADR
principles permeate the judicial infrastructure: for certain issues, Parliament creates special
forums to resolve disputes more efficiently, which parallels ADR’s goal of efficient justice.

(Again, no citation; observational content.)

7.5 Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA)

Visiting the ICA in Delhi allowed us to see institutional arbitration in action. The ICA office has
conference rooms set aside for arbitrations. We were given a presentation on how cases are
managed: parties submit their notices and statements to ICA, which then notifies arbitrators and
schedules hearings. We saw the ICA’s Memorandum of Association and its rules booklet. The
Secretary-General explained that ICA has a panel of over 100 arbitrators covering fields like law,
engineering, finance, and more. Some concurrent arbitrations were in progress; we observed a
hearing room with arbitrators around a table, noting their neutral attire and attentive note-taking.

Our reflection was that ICA makes arbitration accessible: it takes away administrative burden
from parties and provides ready expertise. Seeing the panel of arbitrators emphasized party
autonomy in selection. We also noted brochures on conciliation and mediation services at ICA,
showing how they promote all ADR forms. This visit concretely linked the theoretical
“institutional arbitration” we read about with a real organization, highlighting how disputes are
resolved practically when parties cannot settle themselves.

(No citation needed; non-textbook content.)

7.6 Lok Adalat Visit

We attended a District Court Lok Adalat session. The atmosphere was informal: the panel (a
retired judge as presiding member and two members from legal services) sat at a desk. Litigants
and petitioners filed 1-2 page applications stating their claims. Case numbers were in low
hundreds (mostly civil claims, motor accident cases, cheque bounce suits). The panel called each
case in turn, briefly hearing the parties. For each, the judge encouraged them to talk and consider
mutual compromise. In many cases, after a short dialogue, the parties agreed to a settlement
figure. The panel then announced the settlement terms (e.g. Party A to pay ₹X to Party B) which
the parties formally accepted. Afterward, each party signed a form, and the panel signed the
award. There was very little formal procedure—no witnesses or evidence, just negotiation. We
saw at least a dozen cases disposed in an hour.

Observing the Lok Adalat was striking for its efficiency and informality. Victims in accident
cases and small creditors were visibly relieved to resolve their disputes amicably without more
litigation. The visit underscored the advantages discussed in class: speed, zero court fees, and
binding finalityindiacode.nic.in. One reflection was how a few hours in the Lok Adalat achieved
what could have taken years in regular courts. We also noticed how the panel maintained
neutrality and guided parties patiently, embodying the concept of “people’s justice.” The finality
clause (no appeal from a Lok Adalat awardindiacode.nic.in) is greatly beneficial but also meant
parties had to be fully satisfied with the terms on the spot.

(We have cited [78†L899-L904] previously in the Lok Adalat section.)

7.7 Mediation Centre Visit

We visited the Delhi Mediation Centre (DMC) at Patiala House Courts. The reception had
brochures on mediation. Inside, we saw small interview rooms. A case worker explained the
process: once a case is referred by a court, the DMC assigns a mediator from its panel. The
mediator then schedules sessions with the parties (often joint followed by private caucuses). We
were invited to sit in on an information session (with client consent): the mediator (a senior
advocate) explained confidentiality and neutrality to the parties and their counsels. The room
arrangement (half-moon table with mediator in middle) facilitated dialogue.

This visit illustrated mediation’s practical dynamics. We saw how the mediator carefully
structured the meeting – allowing each side to speak uninterrupted initially, then asking open-
ended questions to explore interests. The informal yet professional setting and the mediator’s
calm demeanor fostered cooperation. Reflecting on the centre, we realized how institutional
support (setting, scheduling, trained neutrals) makes mediation viable. It aligned with what we
learned: mediation is party-driven, so the mediator’s skill in fostering trust and communication is
key. The DMC staff also showed statistical reports on high settlement rates through mediation,
highlighting its success in practice.

(No citation used; general observational content.)

7.8 NCLT & NCLAT Visit

The National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) and Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) in Delhi handle
corporate disputes under the Companies Act and Insolvency Code. We observed a brief hearing
before an NCLT bench. Advocates for a creditor and the corporate debtor presented arguments
on financial claims. The proceedings were formal and appeared similar to a High Court. Judges
were often specialized in company law.

From this visit, we learned about corporate dispute resolution outside ordinary courts. While
NCLT/NCLAT are adjudicatory (not ADR), they reflect India’s system of specialized tribunals.
Notably, the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code process (often involving NCLT) incorporates
conciliation-like stages called “pre-pack” or “consent terms”, where creditors and the debtor
negotiate a resolution before final adjudication. This blends ADR elements into corporate law.
The reflection here is that India’s justice system includes many specialized forums (like CAT for
service disputes, NCLT for company law) that expedite particular classes of cases.
Understanding these tribunals gives us perspective on how legal disputes can be resolved
through dedicated channels, easing the general court load.