Alternative DISPUTE RESOLUTION
BAL & BLJ 5.6 CLINIC-I ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
FIVE-YEAR INTEGRATED DEGREE COURSE ACADEMIC YEAR: 2025-2026
3RD YEAR, SEMESTER-V
BY: NEHA CHOUDHARY
MODULE - l
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) refers to various
methods used to resolve disputes outside the
traditional judicial process. ADR encompasses
techniques like arbitration, mediation, conciliation,
and negotiation. These methods offer parties the
opportunity to resolve conflicts in a more flexible,
cost-effective, and timely manner compared to
conventional court proceedings.
Scope of ADR in India
Arbitration:
Arbitration is a process where disputing parties agree to submit their conflict to one or more
arbitrators who make a binding decision. It's commonly used in commercial disputes.
Scope: Widely used in commercial contracts, construction projects, and international trade disputes.
Mediation:
Mediation involves a neutral third party (mediator) who helps the disputing parties reach a mutually
acceptable solution. The mediator does not impose a decision but facilitates dialogue.
Scope: Suitable for family disputes, labour disputes.
Conciliation:
Similar to mediation, but the conciliator may take a more active role in suggesting terms of
settlement.
Scope: Often used in industrial disputes and consumer disputes.
Negotiation:
A process where parties directly interact to resolve their disputes without the involvement of third
parties.
Scope: Compensation, Plea Bargaining.
Use of ADR in Ramayana, Mahabharata?
The Broken Bridge Deal
Two companies, EcoBuild Ltd. and SteelCore Inc., entered into a joint venture
to construct a sustainable bridge in a major city. EcoBuild, a green architecture
firm, provided the design and project management, while SteelCore, a
construction supplier, was responsible for delivering eco-friendly steel
components.
Halfway through the project, delays started piling up. EcoBuild claimed
SteelCore was delivering materials late and not meeting the agreed
sustainability standards. SteelCore countered that EcoBuild kept changing the
specifications, causing confusion and extra costs.
Tensions escalated. The project came to a standstill. Deadlines were missed.
The city threatened to cancel the contract. Both companies want to resolve
the dispute without going to court—to save money, protect their reputations,
and hopefully continue working together.
As a dispute resolution expert, which ADR method
would you recommend—mediation, arbitration,or
negotiation—to resolve the conflict between
EcoBuild and SteelCore?
Choose your side.
Justify your choice using logic, examples, and
potential benefits.
Pre-British Era (Before 1608)
Traditional Dispute Resolution Bodies (Smritis):
• Puga: Local village groups resolving communal issues.
• Gana: Larger assemblies with representatives from
multiple villages/towns; resolved conflicts.
• Sereni: Trade guilds; regulated trade, set standards, and
settled commercial disputes.
• Kula: Handled family/kinship disputes (inheritance,
marriage, property); led by eldest male.
• These bodies had binding authority; decisions were final
and based on customs.
British Era (1608–1947)
Judicial Reforms and Legal Changes:
• Introduction of codified law based on English Common Law.
• Traditional bodies became redundant; replaced by formal centralized
courts.
• Bengal Regulation Act, 1772: First recognition and regulation Act.
• Litigation became the main method of dispute resolution.
• Initially applied religious laws, but later discarded them for uniformity.
• Native laws were found inconsistent with British civil laws.
• Appointed Pandits and Maulavis to assist in compiling Hindu/Muslim laws.
• After 1858, East India Company rule transferred to the British Crown.
• Formation of various legal codes; complete shift to Common Law system.
• No incorporation of Hindu, Muslim, or customary laws; opposed by British
scholars.
1698: First Arbitration Act passed in England under William
III.
India:
1899: First Indian Arbitration Act (based on UK Arbitration
Act, 1889); limited to Presidency towns.
Criticized for court interference and forced
compromises.
Arbitration Act, 1940
India signed:
Geneva Protocol, 1923 (Arbitration Clauses)
Geneva Convention, 1927 (Execution of Foreign
Awards)
1940 Act (based on UK Arbitration Act, 1934) came into
effect on 1 July 1940.
Section 8: Court can appoint arbitrator/umpire.
Section 11: Court can remove arbitrator/umpire.
Issues:
Limited participation, complexity, open-ended
interpretations.
Arbitration remained litigation-heavy and inefficient.
International Developments
New York Convention, 1958:
Recognition/enforcement of foreign arbitral
awards.
India signed in 1960.
More global acceptance (172 countries by
2024).
UNCITRAL Model Law, 1985:
Provided procedural framework for
arbitration.
Adopted by 126+ jurisdictions by 2025.
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996
Based on UNCITRAL Model Law.
Enacted to:
Modernize and consolidate arbitration laws.
Cover domestic, international commercial
arbitration, and foreign award enforcement.
Replaced:
Arbitration Act, 1940
Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015
Key Amendments (2015)
Section 2(2):
Allows interim measures (Sec 9, 27, 37) in international arbitration, even if
seat is outside India (unless agreed otherwise).
Balances Bhatia International and BALCO judgments.
Section 8:
Courts must mandatorily refer parties to arbitration unless prima facie no
valid agreement exists.
Overrides earlier court judgments.
Section 11:
Judicial appointment of arbitrators by SC/HC.
Disposal of application within 60 days.
Section 12:
Arbitrator must declare independence & impartiality.
Fifth Schedule added listing grounds for disqualification.
Section 17:
Arbitral tribunals can grant interim measures similar to
courts.
Section 29A:
Time limit of 12 months to pass award; extendable by 6
months.
Beyond that, court extension needed or mandate ends.
Section 29B:
Introduced Fast-Track Procedure for arbitration.
Section 34:
Awards can be set aside if against public policy, or
obtained by fraud/corruption.
Other amended sections: 23, 24, 25, 28, 31, 36, 37.
Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019
Background
• Based on recommendations of Justice B.N. Srikrishna Committee (2016).
• Focus: Speedy appointment of arbitrators and promote institutional
arbitration.
• Initial 2018 Bill lapsed, reintroduced and passed in 2019.
• Fix gaps from 2015 Amendment Act.
• Make India a global arbitration hub.
• Reduce court case backlog.
Key Provisions
Establishment of Arbitration Council of India (ACI)
Responsible for grading arbitral institutions.
Recognizes professional institutes for arbitrator accreditation.
Section 11(3A):
Empowers SC and HCs to designate arbitral institutions (graded by ACI).
Chief Justice of HC can review arbitrator panels rated by ACI.
30-day time limit for appointment after application by party.
Arbitration & Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2021
Section 36(3) (Enforcement of Arbitral Awards):
If court finds prima facie fraud or corruption, it must
stay the arbitral award unconditionally.
Applies pending disposal of challenge under
Section 34.
Ensures fraudulent/corrupt awards are not
enforced.
The Mediation Act 2023
Pre-British era
SMRITIES: types:
Puga: Typically a group of people from the same locality or village who came together to
address communal issues and disputes.
Gana: Similar to Puga but often referred to larger assemblies or collectives, which could
include representatives from multiple villages or towns. These assemblies played a crucial role
in decision-making and conflict resolution
Sereni: Regulated trade practices, set standards for goods and services, and resolved disputes
among their members. They had their own set of rules and regulations, and they often acted
as mediators in disputes related to trade, labour, and contracts.
Kula: Responsible for resolving family and kinship disputes, including issues related to
inheritance, marriage, and property. The head of the Kula, often the eldest male member,
would preside over these disputes, ensuring that the resolution was in line with traditional
customs and family honour.
These bodies functioned with binding authority, and their decisions were respected as final.
PRE INDEPENDENCE ERA (1608 -1947)
• Britishers introduced codified law, based on England laws or common law of England.
• Conciliatory bodies of dispute resolution were replaced by centralized judicial system.
• Formal courts were introduced.
• The British introduced the Bengal Regulation Act of 1772, which recognized and regulated
arbitration proceedings.
• Litigation became one of the key mode to resolve the disputes as Britishers gave hype to
litigation and judicial system and all other institutions set up before became redundant.
• Initially they work on religiously based law and judicial system, but later didn’t work.
• Native law not matching to civil law.
• Appointed legal scholars to compile native and English law. Pandits and Moulavis assisted
the British scholars.
With the change of east India company to crown in 1858 a
series of codes were formed and this is how common law
system was formed and introduced in India. No borrowing
from hindu, muslim or customary law. British scholars
opposes this.
The Act CPC was first enacted in the year 1859 as Act No.
8 of 1859. The Code was thereafter, amended several
times in the years, 1860, 1861, 1878, 1879, and 1882.
In 1908, CPC was re-enacted, 1909 came in force
The first Arbitration Act was passed in the year 1698
under William III. Later on changes were made in
accordance with the need. In India, first Arbitration
Act was passed in the year 1899 and then after
Arbitration Act, 1940 was enacted but it was also
rejected due to some ambiguities in it. Finally in the
year 1996, Government came up with "The
Arbitration Conciliation Act" which is in continuance
with the recent amendment in 2021.
ADR UNDER DIFFERENT INDIAN STATUTORY LAWS AND ROLE OF JUDICIARY TOWARDS IT
(A) INDIAN ARBITRATION ACT, 1899
Legislative Council of India, 1834 expressed the codification of Arbitration laws for the 1" time.
Henceforth, Arbitration Act was enacted in the year 1899. The act was based on the British Arbitration
Act, 1889. Although it was effective only in presidency towns such as Calcutta, Madras and Bombay.
Lot of court intervention, arbitration was just a compromise or forced compromise.
Need to change
B) THE ARBITRATION ACT, 1940
India became a signatory to the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses, 1923 (1923 Protocol), and the
Execution of Foreign Arbitration Awards, 1927 (Geneva Convention of
in the year 1937
In result of the reformation, The Arbitration Act 1940 was enacted. It was based on the British Arbitration
Act, 1934. It came into force on the 1St day of July, 1940.
Section 8 of the Arbitration Act gives power to the Court to appoint arbitrator or umpire.
Section 11 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 gave power to Court to remove arbitrators or umpires.
. The Geneva Convention of 1927
For the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards," was an international treaty developed under the auspices
of the League of Nations. It aimed to facilitate the recognition and enforcement of arbitration agreements
and arbitral awards across national borders.
Limited participation of states
Limited scope, more at rejection side.
Diverse interpretation: open ended interpretations of the sections
New York Convention in 1958, formally known as the "Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards
1960- India became signatory to it
172 Signatory States (as of January 2023)
More acceptance
It streamlined the process for recognizing and enforcing foreign arbitral awards, reducing the grounds on
which recognition and enforcement could be refused
UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law) modern law,
1985 on International commercial arbitration.
First Amendment made in 2006
What was the need of this law?
India adopted the principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International
Commercial Arbitration through the enactment of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996. This Act governs arbitration proceedings in India and
aligns with the Model Law's provisions to a significant extent.
The New York Convention primarily deals with the recognition and
enforcement of arbitral awards and agreements but does not provide detailed
procedural rules for the conduct of arbitration proceedings. Therefore, the
UNCITRAL Model Law was developed to address this gap.
126+ Jurisdiction adopted it by 2025
ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION ACT, 1996
129th Law Commission Report: in the year 1988 advocated the need for amicable settlement of
disputes between parties, the committee recommended to make it mandatory for courts to refer
disputes, after their issues having been framed by courts for resolution through alternate means rather
than litigation/ trials. The Committee submitted that there is a need for
decentralisation of the system of administration of justice by:-
(i) Establishing other tiers or systems within the judicial hierarchy to reduce the volume of work in the
Supreme Court and the High Court.
(ii) Establishing, extending and strengthening in rural areas the institution of Nyaya Panchayats or other
mechanism for resolving disputes.
Hence, to improvise the 1940 Act, Government came up with
"The Arbitration Conciliation Act, 1996". This act was made to consolidate and amend the law relating
to domestic arbitration, international commercial arbitration and enforcement of foreign arbitral
awards as also to define the law relating to conciliation.
The Act replaced the Arbitration Act, 1940, the Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937, and
the Foreign Award (Recognition and
Enforcement) Act, 1961.
Law Commission Report 245th titled "Arrear
sand Backlog: Creating additional Judicial
man power" says that huge backlog of
cases are only due to current judges
strength which is inadequate. The system is
not being able to keep pace with the new
cases being instituted, and is not being
able to dispose of a comparable no. of
cases.
Further, Law Commission of India under the chairmanship of Justice AP Shah
had constituted an expert committee to work on the 246th Report titled
"Amendment to Arbitration and Conciliation Act. 1996." It proposed several
changes to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.
ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2015
In 2015, Government came up with the Arbitration and Conciliation
(Amendment) Act, 2015. There was a need to amend the act of 1996 in order
to make the arbitration in India more popular, cost effective method of
dispute resolution. The main objective was to shift the people from the court's
tyrannical method of dispute resolution to the speedy justice of Arbitration
Tribunal. The Act came into force on October 23, 2015. The purpose was also
to make the country's dispute resolution mechanism in conformity with the
International standards.
Changes which were brought up by the Act 2015
Amendment of Section 2(2): A proviso to Section 2(2) has been added which envisages that
subject to the agreement to the contrary, Section 9 (interim measures), Section 27(taking of
evidence), and Section 37(1)(a), 37(3) shall also apply to international commercial arbitrations,
even if the seat of arbitration is outside India, meaning thereby that the new law has tried to
strike a kind of balance between the situations created by the judgments of Bhatia
International and Balco v. Kaiser. Now Section 2(2) envisages that Part-I shall apply where the
place of arbitration is in India and that provisions of Sections 9, 27, 37(1) (a) and 37 (3) shall also
apply to international commercial arbitration even if the seat of arbitration is outside India
unless parties to the arbitration agreement have agreed to the contrary.
Amendment to Section 8: (Reference of parties to the dispute to arbitration): In Section 8, which
mandates any judicial authority to refer the parties to arbitration in respect of an action brought
before it, which is subject matter of arbitration agreement . The sub-section(1) has been
amended envisaging that notwithstanding any judgment, decree or order of the Supreme
Court or any court, the judicial authority shall refer the parties to the arbitration unless it finds
that prima facie no valid arbitration agreement exists.
Section 11 of the Act allowed the judicial
appointment of arbitrators which shall be final by
the SC and HC. The application of appointment of
Arbitrator shall be disposed of within 60 days.
Amendment to Section 12: Amendment to Section 12, as
per the new law makes the declaration on the part of the
arbitration about his independence and impartiality more
onerous. A Schedule has been inserted (Fifth Schedule)
which lists the grounds that would give rise to justifiable
doubt to independence and impartiality of arbitrator
Section 17 of the Act grants power to the arbitral tribunal to provide all kind of
interim measures which the Court is empowered to grant under the Section 9 of
the Arbitration Act within 90 days.
Insertions of new Section 29A and 29B( Time limit for arbitral award and Fast
Track Procedure): award shall be made by the arbitral tribunal within 12
months from the date it enters upon reference. This period can be extended to
a further period of maximum 6 months by the consent of the parties, after
which the mandate of the arbitrator shall terminate, unless the Court extends it
for sufficient cause or on such other terms it may deem fit.
Section 34 provides to set aside arbitral award passed in an international
arbitration against public policy, fraud, corruption.
Other amended sections of the act is: 23, 24, 25, 28, 31, 36, 37
THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2019
In the year 2016, a Committee was formed under the chairmanship
of Justice BN Srikrishna to look into the speedy appointment of
arbitrators and to promote institutionalised arbitration. The intention
was to make India a hub of Arbitration Centre. Subsequently, an
amendment was done in the year 2018 but it was lapsed due to
the dissolution of Houses. In 2019 NDA Government came up with
the updated version of the same bill. Lok Sabha received the
assent of the President on 9th August, 2019. The intention for the
Amendment is to fix the loopholes created by the Arbitration and
Conciliation Amendment Act, 2015. The idea behind this
amendment is to make India a hub of Arbitration Tribunal due to
lots of pending cases in the Indian Courts.
Establishment of Arbitration Council of India (Council) for the
purpose of inter-alia framing policies governing the grading of
arbitral institutions and recognizing professional institutes' providing
accreditation of arbitrators.
Sub- section 3A is added in the Section 11 of the Act. It gives power
to the Supreme Court and the High Court to designate, arbitral
institutions, from time to time, which have been graded by the
Council under section 43-I, for the purposes of this Act. Chief Justice
of the concerned High Court is allowed to review the panel of
arbitrators as rated by the Arbitral Council.
Appointment timing 30 days after the application enunciated by
the concerned party.
THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION (AMENDMENT) ACT, 2021
Enforcement (Section 36 (3))
The amendment provides that if the court is satisfied that a
prima facie case of fraud or corruption is made out, it shall
stay the operation of the arbitral award unconditionally,
pending disposal of the challenge under Section 34 to the
award. This change aims to ensure that awards obtained
through fraud or corruption do not get enforced.
Aspect Litigation Arbitration
Nature Judicial process Private, consensual process
Authority Court of law Arbitrator(s) appointed by parties
Formality Highly formal with strict procedural rules formal, more flexible procedures
Confidentiality Generally public Generally private and confidential
Control Judge controls the proceedings Parties have more control over selection of arbitrators
Timeframe Often lengthy with potential for appeals Usually faster, limited grounds for appeal
Costs Potentially higher due to court fees and prolonged process Can be lower, though arbitrator fees can be significant
Arbitral awards are enforceable under treaties like the New York
Enforceability Court judgments are enforceable
Convention
Flexibility Limited flexibility in terms of procedures and schedules More flexible, parties can agree on procedures and timelines
Expertise Judges may not have specific expertise in the subject matter Arbitrators can be chosen for their expertise in relevant areas
Right to Appeal Decisions can be appealed through higher courts limited grounds for appeal
Binding Nature Decisions are binding and enforceable by law Awards are binding and enforceable, similar to court judgments
Arbitration Mediation
Mediation is a voluntary and party-centric procedure
Arbitration can be regarded as a quasi-judicial process. It is a mode or system of
where the parties to the dispute settle their issues with the
Meaning solving disputes among the parties through a unbiased third party called the
help of a neutral third party called the mediator. It is
arbitrator whose decision is binding on the parties.
collaborative.
Procedure It is a formal procedure like judicial proceedings. It is an informal process.
Third party Third party is termed as the arbitrator. The third party is termed as a mediator.
One arbitrator is known as the sole arbitrator, and there can be more than one
Number of third party arbitrator.
One mediator.
Nature of award They are binding upon both parties. They are binding in nature.
The outcome of the arbitration depends upon the evidence, documents, etc.; the The outcome of the mediation depends upon the
Control over outcome decision depends upon the arbitrators. parties.
In arbitration the parties put forward their issue or difference before the arbitrator. The Mediator cannot pass any order. A binding
Decision The arbitrator after hearing both the parties gives their decision i.e, an arbitral settlement is concluded only when the parties arrive at a
award. The arbitral award is legally enforceable and binding upon both the parties. mutually agreeable solution.
Conciliation
Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution method in
Meaning which an expert is appointed to resolve a dispute by
convincing the parties to agree upon an agreement.
Regulation The Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996
Number of Third
More than one conciliator.
party
In Conciliation, confidentiality is ascertained by the relevant
Confidentiality
legal provisions.
Nature of third
In conciliation, the conciliator plays a more active role.
party
In Conciliation, the conciliator plays an active part in
Third party evaluating the contentions and providing suggestions on
Justice Malimath Committee Report
Committee was constituted in November 2000. Officially known as the "Committee on Reforms of Criminal
Justice System," was submitted in 2003 under the chairmanship of Dr. Justice V.S. Malimath, former Chief
Justice of the Karnataka and Kerala High Courts.
Its primary focus was on criminal justice, but it also made significant recommendations regarding
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms.
The Committee strongly advocated the use of ADR mechanisms in criminal justice, particularly for less
serious offenses, to alleviate the burden on the courts and provide swifter justice
• less serious cases – Hurt, some compoundable offences (Cheating, Assault), plea
bargaining(Amendment 2005 in crpc), Section 320 (Compounding of Offences) of crpc
1973.
• Compensation settlement through the meditation centre
• Rehabilitation and compensation of victim in juvenile cases or first time offender through
conciliation.
• The committee underscored the need for training judicial officers, police, and other
stakeholders in ADR techniques and principles.
• Establish ADR centres at the district and taluka levels to provide accessible ADR services to
the public.
• Proposed setting up mechanisms to monitor and evaluate the performance of ADR
institutions and processes.
Constitutional Background of ADR
Article 14: Equality before law — ADR ensures equal access
to justice.
Article 21: Right to life and personal liberty — includes
speedy trial.
Article 39A: Directive Principle — mandates free legal aid
and equal justice.
Eg: Lok Adalats under the Legal Services Authorities Act,
1987, fulfill this constitutional mandate.
Justice V.R Krishna Iyer and Justice P.N Bhagwati Committees report for weaker section of the
society proposed the free legal aid. Based on this the State adopted Lok Adalat and Legal Aid
Camps, Family courts, meditation centres, women centre, consumer protection forum every
platform which uses ADR systems.
Legislations Recognizing ADR in India
1. Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
To provide free legal aid and establish Lok Adalats.
Impact: Institutionalized ADR at the grassroots level.
Eg: Lok Adalats have resolved thousands of cases, especially
cheque bounce and motor accident claims.
2. Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999 – Section 89
Courts must refer disputes to ADR if a settlement seems possible.
ADR Modes Recognized: Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, Lok
Adalat, Judicial Settlement.
Case Law: Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey
Construction Co. (2010) clarified the scope and procedure under
Section 89.
3. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Based on: UNCITRAL Model Law.
Domestic and international arbitration, and conciliation.
Amendments: 2015, 2019, and 2021 amendments enhanced institutional
arbitration and reduced court interference.
Case Law: Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc.
(2012) — clarified the non-applicability of Part I to foreign-seated arbitrations.
4. Mediation Act, 2023
Establishes a uniform legal framework for mediation across India.
Key Features:
Mandatory pre-litigation mediation in civil and commercial disputes.
Recognition of online mediation.
Establishment of Mediation Councils.
Strengthens mediation as a formal and enforceable ADR mechanism.
5. The Commercial Courts Act, 2015:
Promotes speedy resolution of commercial disputes
through ADR methods.
Key Provisions:
Encourages pre-institution mediation and settlement
for commercial disputes.
6. The Consumer Protection Act, 2019:
Introduces provisions for mediation in consumer disputes.
Key Provisions:
Establishment of consumer mediation cells at district,
state, and national levels.
Institutional Support
NITI Aayog and ADR:
The NITI Aayog has been advocating for the promotion and
institutionalization of ADR mechanisms to improve the ease of doing
business and enhance the efficiency
of the justice delivery system.
Indian Council of Arbitration (ICA):
An institution dedicated to promoting and facilitating arbitration in India.
Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC):
Established by the Supreme Court to oversee the implementation of
mediation and conciliation across the country.
Court-Annexed ADR & Statutory Mechanisms
Section 89 CPC
Objective: Courts must refer disputes to ADR if settlement is
possible.
ADR Options: Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, Lok Adalat,
Judicial Settlement.
Case Law: Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. clarified that courts can refer
cases even without parties’ consent (except arbitration).
Civil Procedure – ADR & Mediation Rules, 2006
Framed by High Courts under Section 89(2)(d).
Purpose: Standardize mediation procedures in courts.
Victim-Offender Mediation
Concept: Dialogue between victim and offender to
promote healing and restitution.
Eg: Used in juvenile justice and minor criminal cases.
Case Law: Anupam Sharma v. NCT of Delhi — Delhi HC
recognized restorative justice as part of mediation.
Compounding of Offences
Section 320 CrPC: Allows certain offences (like hurt,
defamation) to be settled between parties.
Gian Singh v. State of Punjab — SC allowed compounding
even in non-compoundable offences in special
circumstances.
Plea Bargaining
Introduced in 2006 under Chapter XXI-A of CrPC.
Types: Charge bargaining, sentence bargaining.
Used in minor theft or cheating cases to reduce sentence and avoid trial.
Motor Vehicles Act
Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACT) resolve compensation claims.
Example: MACTs use conciliation to settle claims quickly.
Case Law: Rajesh v. Rajbir Singh (2013) — SC emphasized just compensation and
speedy disposal.
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Section 138: Cheque bounce cases.
ADR Use: Mediation and plea bargaining encouraged to reduce pendency.
Lok Adalats and special mediation cells resolve cheque bounce cases
efficiently.
ADR Models or Process
• Amicable, party decision
• Sometimes court refer the parties to ADR
1) Determinative Process
2) Facilitative Process
3) Advisory Process
4) Combined or Hybrid Process
Determinative Process
A third party makes a binding decision after hearing both sides.
• Common forms: Arbitration, adjudication, expert determination.
• Eg: Two construction companies disagree over project delays.
They go to arbitration, where an arbitrator hears both sides and
issues a binding award.
• Case Law: Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical
Services Inc. (BALCO), 2012 The Supreme Court clarified that Part I
of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applies only to
arbitrations seated in India.
Facilitative Process
A neutral third party facilitates communication between parties to
help them reach a mutual agreement.
Common forms: Mediation, conciliation.
Example: A divorcing couple uses mediation to decide child custody
and asset division, with the mediator guiding the conversation but
not imposing a solution.
Case Law: Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Cherian Varkey Construction
Co. (2010) The Supreme Court emphasized that mediation and
judicial settlement can be referred by courts without party consent
under Section 89 CPC.
Advisory Process
A neutral expert evaluates the dispute and gives a non-binding
opinion or recommendation.
Neutral evaluation, expert appraisal.
Eg: In a patent dispute, a technical expert reviews both inventions
and advises on likely court outcomes, helping parties settle.
Case Law: Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Co. (1985)
Though primarily about arbitration, it highlighted the role of expert
opinion in international commercial disputes.
Combined or Hybrid Process
A blend of two or more ADR methods—e.g., Med-Arb (mediation
followed by arbitration).
Med-Arb, Arb-Med
Eg: Parties first try mediation. If it fails, the same neutral becomes an
arbitrator and issues a binding decision.
Case Law: Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail
Ltd. (2021) Though not a classic hybrid case, it involved emergency
arbitration—a hybrid of urgent relief and arbitration.
A family business dispute is mediated. They resolve most issues, but
one is left unresolved. The mediator switches roles and arbitrates the
final issue.
