INTRODUCTION :-
WHAT IS ADR?
ADR is an abbreviation that stands for Alternative Dispute
Resolution. It also stands for Appropriate Dispute Resolution. ADR refers to
all those methods of resolving a dispute, which are alternatives for litigation
in the courts. ADR processes are decision making processes to resolve disputes
that do not involve litigation or violence. Unlike the courts, which use
adversarial processes, ADR focuses on effective communication and negotiation.
The term “alternative dispute resolution” or “ADR” is
often used to describe a wide variety of dispute resolution mechanisms that are
short of, or alternative to, full-scale court processes. The term can refer to
everything from facilitated settlement negotiations in which disputants are
encouraged to negotiate directly with each other prior to some other legal
process, to arbitration systems or minitrials that look and feel very much like
a courtroom process. Processes designed to manage community tension or
facilitate community development issues can also be included within the rubric
of ADR. ADR systems may be generally categorized as negotiation,
conciliation/mediation, or arbitration systems.
ADR includes Arbitration, Mediation, Conciliation,
Negotiation, Expert Determination, Early Neutral Evaluation by third person,
Mini-Trail, Dispute Resolution Board etc. the approach of judges, lawyers and
parties throughout the world is changing towards the adoption of ADR instead of
court litigation. Arbitral Institutions provide ADR services for quicker, less
costly and consensual resolution of civil disputes outside the crowded court
system. ADR provides creative options to the parties to resolve the disputes
that are not available in traditional Dispute Resolution forums. ADR promotes
communication between the parties. It helps the parties to work together
to solve the real concerns underlying the conflict by focusing on the parties’
real interest instead of their positions and claims.
- CONCEPT OF ADR:-
The concept of Conflict Management through Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) has introduced a new mechanism of dispute resolution
that is non adversarial. A dispute is basically ‘lis inter partes’ and the
justice dispensation system in India has found an alternative to Adversarial
litigation in the form of ADR Mechanism.New methods of dispute resolution such
as ADR facilitate parties to deal with the underlying issues in dispute in a
more cost-effective manner and with increased efficacy. In addition, these
processes have the advantage of providing parties with the opportunity to
reduce hostility, regain a sense of control, gain acceptance of the outcome,
resolve conflict in a peaceful manner, and achieve a greater sense of justice
in each individual case. The resolution of disputes takes place usually in
private and is more viable, economic, and efficient. The Alternative Dispute Resolution
Mechanism has proven to be one the most efficacious mechanisms to resolve
commercial disputes of an international nature. Transcending national
boundaries it renders proportionate judgements over the merchants’ disputes, as
the Law Merchants of Medieval ages rendered justice in light of “fair price”,
good commerce, and equity. In fact, the Law merchant precepts have been
reaffirmed in new international mercantile law. Visualizing the participatory
nature of such laws the ADR method is also formulated in the similar vein.
VARIOUS ADRS:-[1]
The well-known and oldest ADR techniques are Arbitration
and Conciliation/Mediation. There are various others also which are practised
in many countries like USA and other but not known to India.
- ARBITRATION:-
Arbitration is a binding dispute settlement procedure in
which the dispute is submitted to an arbitral tribunal consisting of a sole or
an odd number of arbitrators which makes a decision in the form of an award of
an dispute that is binding on both the parties and thus it finally settles the
dispute. For example:- Lok-Adalats.
- MEDIATION:-
Mediation is a non-binding procedure in which an
impartial and neutral third party, the mediator, assists the parties to a
dispute in reaching a mutually satisfactory and agreed settlement of disputes.
The mediation process is informal and always assisted by negotiation of a
dispute settlement.
- NEGOTIATION:-
The most common form of dispute resolution is
negotiation. Negotiation is a non-binding procedure in which discussions
between the parties are initiated without the intervention of the third party
with the object of arriving at a negotiated settlement of dispute. Objectivity
and willingness to arrive at negotiated settlement on the part of both the
parties are essential characteristics of negotiations.
- CONCILIATION:-
Conciliation is sometimes interchangeably used with
mediation. It is a non-binding procedure in which an impartial third party, the
conciliator assists the parties to a dispute in reaching a mutually
satisfactory and agreed settlement of dispute. The neutral person shall be
chosen by agreement of both the parties i.e. sometimes the family members or a
mutual friend. This is the basic difference between a mediation and a
conciliator.
There are many other methods of ADRS but in general they
are not practised in India.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION PRACTICES IN ANCIENT INDIA :-
A study of the ancient Hindu law on arbitration and
ancient literary works of India such as Vedas, Sutras, Epics, and
Dharmashastras gives us very useful about the Dispute Resolution Institutions
prevailing in the ancient India. Reference to a village Panchayat without court
intervention was one of the natural ways for the ancient Hindus for resolution
of their disputes. Village Panchayats denote villagers mediating between
contending parties in their own village. In some cases, the panchayats mostly
resembled the courts. Also apart from the courts established by the king, there
were other tribunals recognised in the ancient Smrities and texts. The Smrities
refer, in particular, to three types of popular courts. Like Puga[2], Sreni[3] & Kula[4]. These tribunals were
practically arbitration tribunals. Appeals were provided to the courts of
judges appointed by the king and ultimately to the king himself.
EARLY VEDIC AGE :-
The period in which Rigveda, the oldest literary work,
was composed is known as the early Vedic age in the history of India. The
period is approximately from 1500 B.C. to 1000 B.C. We get an idea about the
conditions of the ancient Aryans in india from this literature. During this age
Aryans in India lived in small villages. The basis of their political and
social organization was the family or Kula. During this period, the seeds of
regular system of administration were sown. There were two popular institutions
called Sabha[5] & Samiti[6]. The Sabha enjoyed Inter
alia, certain judicial functions and acted as the National Judiciary. In
addition to these two institutions there were other institutions such as
Vidhata Assembly associated with civil, military and criminal matters. The
system of Arbitration was probably known to the people of the early Vedic age.
The arbitrator/mediator of disputes was called Madyamasi.
LATER VEDIC AGE :-
The period in which Samveda, Yajurveda, Atharvaveda, the
Brahmans, the Aryanakas and the Upanishads were composed during this age. In
this period, the king took more active part in the administration of justice.
The civil cases were decided by the king himself with the help of his
assistants. Sometimes, the king delegated his power to the Adhyaksha[7]. The general
tendency was to encourage the town councils and village panchayats to try local
disputes. Only serious cases were tried in courts. There were also references of
cases which were referred to the tribes for adjudication. At the village level,
petty cases were decided by Gramyavadin[8] with the help of
his case. During this period, the Sabha acted as arbitrator in certain
cases. Sabhapati[9] acted as judge. The
disputes regarding boundaries of property were settled by these Sabhas.
THE SUTRAS AGE :-
The Sutras were the manuals of instructions in the brief
but definite language. The Dharma Sutras were one of the Sutra literatures. The
Dharma Sutras refer to customary law and practice. The Dharma Sutras are
assigned to the period from 600 B.C. to 200 B.C. the great grammarian Panini
lived during this period. The system of Sabhas continued to prevail
during the age of sutras. The Magadha dynasty almost coincided with the Sutras
age. There were Parishads[10] whose decisions on
the interpretations of the texts were binding. The method of procedure
generally adopted in the tribal meetings in the states was not by voting on a
motion. The point at issue was either carried unanimously or referred for
arbitration to a committee of refrees. Besides the central assembly at the
capital, there were local Parishads in all the important places in the
states.
THE EPIC AGE :-
The two great epics namely, Ramayana and Mahabharata were
written during this period. The epic age is roughly estimated around 500 B.C.
and 200 B.C. during the period of epics, there were large number of states in
India. The ordinary form of government was the Kingship but there were also
republics. The king respected the laws of Pugas or village communities, Srenis
or guilds of a particular occupation, Kulas or assembly of members of a
clan, Jatis or castes and janapadas or regions. The Sabhas i.e.
popular courts continued to flourished in the Epic age too because their
decisions were usually upheld by the kings. The system of arbitration seems to
have been popular in this period.
PERIOD OF DHARMASHATRAS:-
A study of Dharmashastras such as Manu-Smriti,
Yajnavalkya, Smriti and Narada Smriti, give us useful information about the
dispute resolution institutions prevailing over that time. The period of Dharmashastras
is the ninth century A.D. the Dharamshastra of Yajnavalkya mention three types
of popular courts viz. Puga, Sreni and Kula. It may be noted that these courts
tried only civil cases[11]. Against the decisions of
these courts, appeals were provided to the courts of judges appointed by the
king, and ultimately to the king himself. In some cases, there was an appeal
from one arbitration court to another. There were Parishads and such
other autonomous bodies also in the Dharmashastras period.
DISPUTE RESOLUTION PRACTISES IN MEDIEVAL INDIA:-
Medieval India is a period of history of India when
Muslims ruled India starting from the Arab conquest of Sindh in 712 A.D to the
death of Bahadur Shah 2 in 1857. Medieval India witnessed different judicial
administrations by different rules in different periods of time. A study of
Muslim Law during the Muslim rule and the judicial administration under Arabs,
Sultans, Mughals, Vijayanagar Empire and Marathas give us very useful information
about the dispute resolution practise followed in the medieval India.
MUSLIM LAW DURING THE MUSLIM RULE :
During the Muslim rule, all the Muslims in India were
governed by the Islamic laws- The Shari’ah, as contained in the Hedaya,
commentary on the Islamic Laws. The non-Muslims continued to be governed by
their own personal laws, which have been compendiously describe as the Hindu
law. However, with respect to transactions between Muslims and non-Muslims, a
hybrid system of arbitration laws developed. The Hedaya contains provisions for
tahkeem (arbitration) between the parties. According to it, a Hakam (an
arbitrator) was required to possess the qualities essential for a kazi or kazee
(an official judge presiding over a Court of law). If two parties to a dispute
appointed an arbitrator and expressed their desire to abide by his award, he
would proceed with the arbritation. Any one of the parties could retract before
the award was made. That would be the end of the arbitration. But, in the
absence of such retraction, the arbitrator would proceed to hear the
arbitration and make the award. The award so made was binding on the parties
who appointed arbitrator, expect in cases where the award was invalid on
account of any legal infirmity. But once the parties acknowledge an arbitral
award, they could not afterwards retract from it. Any award passed in favour of
a parent, child or wife was void ab intio. Though the Arabic language had the
sanctity of a religious language of Muslims, the court language throughout the
Muslim era was Persian. The Persian word for arbitrator is Salis and a party to
arbitration is a Salisee. Arbitration agreement is Salisnama while the word for
the award is Faisla. The practise of recourse to arbitration as evolved up to
the end of the Mughal Empire continued during the British period throughout the
country in one form or the other.
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER ARABS :
The justice given to the people by the Arabs although
ready was rough. There was no uniformity of law or uniformity of Courts. There
was a Qazi at the capital and there were similar Qazis in the district towns.
They all decided cases according to Islamic law. Punishments for the Hindus
were severe. If Hindu committed a theft, he was burnt to death. The Hindus decided
their dispute regarding marriage, inheritance and other social matters in their
Panchayats.
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER SULTANS:
The judicial administration under the Sultan was highly
centralised. The king was the fountain head of justice and decided the most
important cases personally. The Sultan was assisted in judicial
administration by the Chief Sadr and the chief Qazi. The formal official
assisted the king in deciding the religious cases in accordance with the Shara,
while the latter assisted the king in deciding the cases of secular character.
In the provinces, the Governor and the Qazi decided the cases. In the villages,
the Panchayats exercised judicial functions. The dispute were decided in
accordance with the Quaranic law. Even in the cases between the Muslims and
non-Muslims the Quaranic law was applied.
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER MUGHALS :
Mughals adopted the system of judicial administration
followed by the Sultans. Babur, Humayun, Jahangir and Shah Jahan considered it
their sacred duty to do justice to all. The king was the fountain of justice.
Next to him, there were Courts of Sadr-us-Sadur (for deciding religious cases)
and Qazi-ul-Qazat (for deciding cases of secular character). The Qazi-ul-Qazat
or Chief Qazi was the highest judicial officer. Often he also held the office
of Sadr-us-sadur. In the provinces, there were separate officials to decide
civil and criminal cases. However, the chief judicial authority in the
provinces was the Qazi. The Qazi was assisted by the Mufti and Miradi. While
the Qazi investigated the evidence, the Mufti expounded the law by spending his
days and nights in reading books on jurisprudence and the reports of cases from
which one can learn precedents and Miradi drew up and pronounced the
judgements. At the level of the Sarkars and parganas, Qazis decided important
cases. At the village level, Panchayat decided most of the cases. The decisions
of the village Panchayat were usually accepted by the people and there were no
appeals against their decisions with the higher courts.
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER VIJYANAGAR EMPIRE:
In Vijayanagar, the king was the fountain of justice and
decided all important cases. At the provincial level, similar powers were
enjoyed by the Governors. In the villages, the cases were decided by the
village assembly. The laws applied were mainly based on customs and traditions.
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION UNDER THE MARATHAS:
The judicial administration under the Marathas was
not that well organised and up-to-date. It was rather simple, crude and
primitive. There was no codified law, no set procedure for trail of cases. The
emphasis was on amicable settlement of disputes. The highest Court was the
Court of the king known as ‘Hazr Majlis’. Most of the important cases were
decided by this Court. The Court also heard appeals against the decisions of
the lower Courts. Next to this Court was the Court of the Nyayadhish or chief
justice. It decided both civil and criminal cases and heard appeals from the
lower Courts. But the day-to-day administration of justices was carried on by
the village Panchayats. The panchayat was the main instrument of civil justice.
The Panchayats were popularly called ‘Panch-Parmeshwar’ and the Panchas were
often addressed as Ma-Bap. Thi decision of the Panchayat was binding on the
parties. An appeal from the decision of the village Panchayat lay to the
Mamlatdar (representative of Peshwa in the district) could assemble a Panchayat
outside the village of disputants. In such suits the Panchayat’s decision was subject
to an appeal to the Peshwa (Prime minister).
ARBITRATION LAW IN MORDEN INDIA:-
In the wake of British Rule, these traditional
institutions of dispute resolution somehow started fading expect the Panch or
Panchayat the traces of which still remain and the Court system introduced by
the British began to rule on the basis of the concept of ‘omissions of rule of
law and the supremacy of law’. With the advent of the British rule, and the
introduction of their legal system into India starting from the Bengal
Resolution of 1772, the traditional system of dispute resolution methods in
India gradually declined. The institution of the hierarchical Court system, the
introduction of elaborate codes of procedure, the pre-eminence given to statue
law vis-à-vis customary law, the emergence of the professional lawyer and the
doctrine of precedents introduced during the British rule, all contribute to
the gradual disappearance of the system of arbitration and other similar
institutions, which prevailed in India till then. The simple and informal
system of arbitration through Panchayats, though useful, was ineffective to
deal with complexities arising out of advancement in social and economic
spheres. But traditional institutions like Panchas and Panchayats have not disappeared
completely. The traces of these institutions are still found among the Backward
classes, where they exercise considerable influence in many social and caste
questions.
The law of Arbitration is known to modern India owes it
evolution, in phases, to the British Rule in India. At the advent of the
British Rule in India, the Panchayats which had been the usual method of
resolution of disputes since ancient times were allowed to work as such. Also
the Indian Legislature, on realising the importance of arbitration in the
changed socio-economic conditions, has made a comprehensive law on arbitration
by enacting the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
ARBITRATION FROM ANCIENT TO MODERN TIMES :-
Let’s summarize all the different methods of arbitration
from ancient to modern times.
Ancient India :-
The concept of arbitration is not new in India. In fact,
it has its roots from ancient times. It was prevalent in India since Vedic
times. At those times the popular village assemblies acted as arbitrators in
resolving disputes. There were also Parishads in Sutras age. The system
of arbitration seemed very popular in the Epic age and the practice of
resolution of disputes between members of particular locality by three types of
arbitral bodies viz. Pugas, Srenis & Kulas, also they
were in practise during the Dharmashastras period. Thus arbitration was
practised in ancient times but in different forms such as Sabhas, Parishads,
Pugas, Srenis and Kulas. They were also known as Panchayats.
Medieval India:-
Medieval India was predominantly characterised by the
Muslim rule. During the Muslim rule, all the Muslims in India were governed by
the Shari’ah, the basic law of all the Muslims. The non-Muslims were
governed by their own personal laws. However, with respect to transactions
between Muslims and non-Muslims, a hybrid system of arbitrations were
developed. Practice of arbitration in the form of Panchayats continued in this
period. When the Arabs ruled India, the Hindus decided their disputes regarding
the marriage, inheritance and other social matters in the Panchayats. Sultans
applied Quranic law in deciding disputes and in the villages, the Panchayats
were permitted to perform judicial functions. During Mughals Rule, Panchayats
decided most of the cases at the village level. The decisions of the village
Panchayats were usually accepted by the people and there were no appeals
against its judgment in higher courts. Same was followed during the Vijaynagar
Empire and also during the Maratha rule.
Modern India:-
In modern times during the British rule,
arbitration in one form or the other was being practised by the native Indians.
Mahatma Gandhi advocated, inter alia, the encouragement of arbitration
courts in lieu of the British law courts in India. Then, with the passing of
the Arbitration Act 1940, arbitration became the main alternative dispute
resolution system amongst the disputants. Most recently, the Indian
Legislature, on realising the importance of arbitration in the changed
socio-economic conditions, has made a comprehensive law on arbitration by
enacting the Arbitration and Cconciliation Act, 1996.
PANCHAYAT SYSTEM AS A SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTE:-
Panchayat system as a process of settlement of disputes
has been in existence in India since ancient times. To refer matters to a
‘Panch’ or ‘Panchayat’ has been one of the natural ways of deciding a variety
of disputes.
MEANING OF PANCHAYAT:-
In general terms panchayat means assembly of elders and
respected inhabitants of a village. Panchayats literally means a body of five persons
and a pancha means a member of that body. The head of pancha is Sarpanch.
KINDS OF PANCHAYAT:-
The panchayats were territorial such as village
Panchayats and sectarian such as Panchayats of different castes and creeds.
There were three grades in Panchas. They were Puga - a board of persons
belonging to different sects and tribes but residing in same locality; Sreni –
an assembly of tradesmen and artisians belonging to different tribes but
connected with each other in some way.; and Kula – assembly of members of
a clan.
POWERS OF PANCHAYATS:-
The Panchas were regarded as Panch Parmeshwar,
before whom no one dared to speak falsehood. The decisions of the Panchayts
were known as Panchets. A Panchet was obeyed without any protest because
it was regarded as the voice of Almighty. However, Panchets were subjects to
revision; decision of Kula can be revised by Srni and decisions of Sreni could
be revised by the Puga and the decision of Puga was to be revised by the king
or the ultimate authority or arbitrator.[12]
Advantages of Alternative disputes Resolution:-
According to P.c. Rao,Secretary-General of the
International Centre
for alternative Disputes Resolution, the following are
the advantages of the
Alternative Disputes Resolution.
(1) It can be used at any time, even When a case is
pending before a
Court of Law, though recourse to ADR as soon as the
dispute arises may
confer maximum advantages on the paries; it can be used
to reduce the
number of contentious issues between the parties; and, it
(except in the case
of binding arbiration) can be terminated at any stage by
one of the
disputing parties.
(2) It can provide a better solution to disputes more
expeitiosly and
at less cost than litigation. It helps in keeping the
disput a privat matter
and promotes creative and realistic business solution,
since the parties are
in control of the ADR proceedings. ADR procedures take
only a day or a
few days to arrive at a settlment.
(3)ADR programmes are flexible and not afficted with
rigours of rules
of procedure.
(4) The freedom of the parties to litigation is not
affected by ADR
proceedings. Even a faild ADR proceeding is never a waste
either in terms
of money or time spent on it, since it helps the parties
to appreciate each
other’s case better.
(5) ADR can be used with or Without a lawyer, however,
plays a very useful role in identification of the
contentious issuse,exposition
of the storng and weak points in a case, rendering advice
during negotiations
and over-all presntation of his client’s case.
(6) ADR procedures help in the reduction of the work-load
of the Courts
and thereby help them to focus attention on the cases
which ought to be
decided by courts.
(7) ADR procedure permits to choose neutrals who are
specicalists
in the subject-matter of the disputes. This does not mean
that there will be a
diminished role for lawyers. they will continue to play a
central role in ADR
processes; however, they will have to adapt their role to
ADR rquirements.
(8)Alternative Dispute Resolution, through amicable
settlement, enables
the parties to resolve the disput and the past; preserve
the present
relationship;and paves a better future Without
unnecessary confrontation and conflict and acrimony.
(9) Alternative Dispute Resolution enables the parties to
overcome from
wasting time on detailed preparation of evidence and
attendance at hearings
and the antagonism and crisicism inherent in adversarial
proceedings against
withnesses.
(11) The time and place of hearing can be chosen by
parties according
to the convenience in ADR.
(12) In ADR, the parties can choose their own rules or
procedure for
dispute settlement.
Limitation of Alternative Dispute Resolution:-
The amicable settlement through ADR is not favoured in
the following
circumstances.
(a) One party may be owed money and simply be looking for
the final
and enforceable decision which can be obtained by
resosting directly to
arbitration or litigation.
(b) A party may owe money and seek to use amicable
settlement as a
delay and discovery mechanism-the other party
may,therefore, be concerned
about the delay,incurring extra costs and being disadvantaged
in subsequent
arbitration or litigation.
(c) Adjudicative methodes may be most appropriate for
resolving some
situations, such as frivolous claims,claims which
compromise a particularprinciple,cases which involve bodily injury or
alleged
criminality,claims to which there is an adequte legal
defence.
Regulations:-
The East India Company framed Regulations some of which
had provisions regarding arbitration. The Regulations recognised arbitration in
suits only.
- Bengal Regulation 1772:- The Bengal Regulation of 1772 provided cases of disputed accounts and other matters, the parties were to submit their cases to arbitration and the award so passed shall become a decree of the Court.
- Bengal Regulation 1781:- Bengal Regulation 1781 imported the idea that a Panchayat was a tribunal of the parties’ own choice. It provided that no award passed by the arbitrator could be set aside except on full proof made by oath of two credible witness that the arbitrator had been guilty of gross corruption of partiality while making his award. This meant that in the absence of misconduct in conducting the arbitration, the parties were bound by the decision given by the arbitrator.
- Bengal Regulation 1787:- Under the Bengal Regulation 1787, the Courts were empowered to refer certain suits to arbitration with the consent of the parties where the value of the suit did not exceed Rs.200 and the suits were for accounts, partnership, debts, non-performance of contracts, etc. it did not provide for any remedy in case of difference of the opinion between the arbitrators or in the event of not delivering the award within the prescribed period.
- Bengal Regulation 1793:- The Bengal Regulation 1793 empowered the Courts to submit the matters in dispute in a suit to the decision of an arbitrator mutually agreed to by the parties, but if they could not agree as to the person to be appointed or if the person nominated by them refused to act and the parties could not agree upon another, the Court with the consent of the parties could appoint an arbitrator who was not interested in the dispute. If the parties did not consent, the case was not to be referred to arbitration but was to be tried by the Court.
- Bengal Regulation 1813:- In the Bengal Regulation 1813, provision was made to make the provision of Regulation of 1793 applicable even to suits with respect to rights in land.
- Bengal Regulation 1814:- By the Bengal Regulation 1814 the restriction imposed upon authorised vakils to act as arbitrators by earlier Regulations were withdrawn.
- Bengal Regulation 1822:- Until 1822 the Regulations permitted references by civil Courts only. The Bengal Regulation 1822 for the first time empowered revenue officers to refer rent and revenue cases to inducing the parties to refer their disputes to arbitration in like manner as the Diwani Courts were directed to do by earlier Regulations.ARBITRATION ACT 1899
The first Indian Arbitration Act was enacted in 1899.
This Act was made applicable to matters which were not pending before a Court
of law for adjudication. The scope of this Act was confined to arbitration by
agreement without the intervention of a Court. This Act recognised for the
first time reference of disputes that might arise in future to an arbitrator whether
named or not. The actual operation of the Act was confined to the Presidency
Towns and was later extended to several other commercial towns. This Act was
largely based on the English Arbitration Act of 1889.
ARBITRATION (PROTOCOL AND CONVENTION) ACT 1937
India is a party to one Protocol and two Multilateral
Conventions. The protocol is the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses of 1923
and the two multilateral conventions are the Geneva Convention on the Execution
of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1927 and the Convention on the Recognition and
Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958, commonly known as the New York
Convention of 1958 because it was negotiated and concluded in New York. India
has enacted implementing legislations to give effect to the Protocol and the
two Conventions. The Arbitration (Protocol and Conventions) Act, 1937 which
came into force on 4th March, 1937, gave effect to the Geneva
Protocol of 1923 (came into force on 28th July, 1924) and the Geneva
Convention of 1927 (came into force 25th July, 1929). The Act
provides for the enforcement of arbitral agreements to which the Protocol
applied and the enforcement of foreign arbitral awards to which the Convention
of 1927 applied.
ARBITRATION ACT 1940
(i) The year 1940 is an important year
in the history of the law of arbitration in British India, as in that year was
enacted the Arbitration Act, 1940. It consolidated and amended the law relating
to arbitration as contained in the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 and the second
Schedule to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It was also largely based on the
English Arbitration Act of 1934 and came into force on 1st July
1940. It extended to the whole of India expect the State of Jammu and Kashmir.
The Act dealt with broadly three kinds of arbitration viz. arbitration without
intervention of a Court, arbitration with intervention of a Court where there
is no suit pending and arbitration in suits. The act laid down the framework
within which domestic arbitration was conducted in India. Save insofar as was
otherwise provided either by the Act or any other Act, it applied to all
arbitrations, including statutory arbitrations. The Salient features of the
Arbitration Act 1940 may be summed up as follows:
- 1. As has been pointed out above, on the eve of the present enactment, the general law of arbitration in British India was contained in the Indian Arbitration Act 1899 and Scheduled 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure of 1908 seen with its sections 89 and 104, which have been repealed by the present Act; it now lays down the general law of arbitration for the whole of British India.
- 2. It made provision for – (a) arbitration without Court-intervention; (b) arbitration in suits i.e., arbitration with Court-intervention in pending suits, and (c) arbitration with Court-intervention, in cases where no suits was pending before the Court.
- 3. It defined the ‘written agreement’ to mean a ‘written agreement’ to submit present or future differences to arbitration, whether an arbitrator is named therein or not’.[sec.2 (2)] In other words, in the absence of a ‘difference’ or an ‘agreement’ to refer the same to arbitration, there could no ‘arbitration’ as postulated by the Act.
- 4. The provisions in the First Scheduled are implied in every arbitration agreement unless excluded (sec.3)
- 5. The effect or death or insolvency of a party to an arbitration agreement on it is now specifically provided for in sections 6 and 7
- 6. A references to three or more arbitrators has now been specifically provided for (sec.10)
- 7. A Court can remove a dilatory or misconducting arbitrator or umpire (sec.11); the Court can, in certain circumstances, fill the vacancy thus caused (sec.12)
- 8. It conferred certain powers on the arbitrators and the umpire to facilitate the effective discharged of their functions (sec.13)
- 9. It empowered the Court to deal judiciary with the award after it had been filed before it, enabling it to pass its judgment, including the discretion to modify, remit or set aside the award. These provisions primarily applied to non-Court-intervention cases (sec.15-19)
10. in cases of arbitrators with Court-interventions, where there was no
pending suit, detailed provisions were made relating to the form and manner of
making an applications to the Court for filing the ‘agreement’ and also as to
an order of references to the arbitrator appointed by the parties. The act
provided that the arbitration shall proceed in accordance with its other
provisions, insofar as they could be made applicable (sec.20)
11. In cases of arbitration with Court-intervention, where a suit was actually
pending in the Court, all the interested parties might agree to refer any
matter in dispute to arbitration. The act made detailed provisions as to the
appointment of arbitrator and the order of reference. The other provisions of
the Act, insofar as they could be made applicable to the arbitration, were made
applicable to such arbitrations as well (sec.21-25)
12. The power enlarge time for making an award is given to the Court only
(sec.28)
13. Section 31 deals with jurisdiction. It provides that all the matters
relating to a single reference shall be before the same Court and that where
there is a choice of forum; it shall be determined by the first applicant made
to a Court in relation to a reference.
- 14. An arbitration agreement or award can be contested only by an application and not by suit (sec.32 and 33)
15. The effect of subsequent legal proceeding on a pending references is dealt
with in (sec.35)
16. If an award be a condition precedent to the institution of a suit, and a
Court pronounces an arbitration not to be effective as regards any particular
difference, it may also such condition not to be effective (sec.36)
17. The provisions of the Limitations Act have been made applicable to
arbitration just as they apply to proceeding in Court (sec.37)
18. Court can be decide the disputes as to remuneration or costs of arbitrators
or umpire (sec.38)
19. Provisions for appeals are made in (sec.39)
20. A small Cause Court has no jurisdiction under this Act expect in respect of
suits pending before it (sec.40)
21. The provisions of the Act are binding on the Government (sec.45)
22. The Act with some specified exception applies to all statutory arbitrations
(sec.46)
23. The provisions of this Act apply to all arbitrations and to all proceedings
there under, an arbitrations award otherwise obtained may be treated as
compromise or adjustment in a pending suit only with the consent of all the
parties interested , which puts an end to the controversy over this point
(sec.47)
24. Under the Act, all awards are to be followed up by a judgment and decree
before being enforced.
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT 1963
Sections 14 (2) of the Specific Relief Act 1963 which
replaced sec.21 of the repealed Specific Relief Act 1877 provides about the
enforceability of non-enforceability of the agreements to refer present or
future dispute/difference between the parties to arbitration. It says that expect
as provided by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, an agreement to refer
a present or future dispute to arbitration shall not be specifically enforced.
But if any person, who has made such a agreement and has refused to perform his
part of the agreement, sues in respect of any of the subject matter about which
he has contracted in the agreement to refer, the existence of such agreement
operates as a bar to filling of the suit. This right to refer the disputes to
arbitrations is a substantive right conferred by the statute. This sub-section
bars a suit pending disposal of a such reference, which bar can be removed
only by the death of the arbitrator and restores the right suit.
Section 25 of the Specific Act 1963 lays down that the
provisions of the chapter 2 of the Act as to contracts shall apply to arbitral
awards to which the Arbitration Act does not apply. This is founded on the
principle that the jurisdiction of the Court in enforcing the Specific
Performance of an arbitral award rests on the ground that the award is the
outcome of a contract to refer to arbitration. This section of the Act does not
have the effect of making a contract. This section only says that an award can
be enforced in the same manner as a contract.
ENACTMENT OF NEW ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT 1996
Uncritical Model law served as a model for preparing the
new act. The president promulgated the Arbitration and Conciliation Ordinance,
1996 in the 16th January 1996 which was brought into force with the
effect from the 25th January 1996. On account of the prorogation of
the Parliament session, the Ordinance could not be replaced by an Act and after
six months, the Ordinance lapsed automatically. In order to give further
continued effect to the provision of the said Ordinance, the President
promulgated the Arbitration and Conciliation (Second) Ordinance 1996 on 26
(Third) Ordinance 1996 on 21st June 1996. Meanwhile, the Arbitration
and Conciliation Bill, 1996, was passed by both the House of Parliament and the
Bill received the assent of the President on 16th August 1996 and
came on the statue book as the ARBITRATION and CONCILIATION ACT, 1996 (26
of 1996) on 22nd August, 1996. In other words, Arbitration and
Conciliation (third) Ordinance, 1996, became the Arbitration and Conciliation
Act 1996 on 22nd August, 1996. The Supreme Court in Furest Day
Lawson Ltd. V. Jindal Export India Ltd[13]. (2001) has held that
although this Act was brought into force with effect from 22nd
August 1996, it became effective from 25st January 1996, the date on which the
First Ordinance was brought into force. The Act consolidates and amends the law
relating to Arbitration in India.
DECLINE OF THE ARBITRATION ACT 1940
The Arbitration Act, 1940 containing the law of
arbitration in India remained static. Though the English Arbitration Act, 1934,
on which the 1940 Act was based, had been replaced by the English Arbitration
Act, 1950, which in its turn was amended by the Arbitration Act, 1975, and the
Arbitration Indian Act of 1940 had remained static.
(1) Adverse comments of the Public Accounts
Committee
The act 1940 had become increasingly outmoded and
discredited. The Public Accounts Committee of the fifth and sixth Lok Sabha
commented adversely on the working of the Arbitration Act 1940. Its complaints
mainly related to the long delay that took place in the completion of Arbitral
proceeding, the number of extension of the period permitted for making the
award that were obtained either by consent of the parties of through the
intervention of the Court, the several number of years taken for completion of
arbitral proceeding, and the enormous expenses incurred by way of fees payable
both to the arbitrators and council. In the light of this adverse
comments, the Government of India decided to have a second look at the
provision of the Arbitration Act, 1940 and , for the purpose, referred the
matter, in 1977, to the Law Commission for its examination.
(2) Recommendation of Law Commission
The Law Commission submitted the Report of the Law
Commission to the Government on 9th November 1978. The Report
recommended the necessity to amend the 1940 Act to suit the felt needs of the
time including developing economy of the country. List of the recommendation in
brief were as follows:
I In Section 2 (a), an Explanation should
be inserted to the effect that were the members of any association agree to
abide by the Rules of the association which contained provisions for
arbitration, the members shall be deemed to agree with each other for
arbitration.
II Section 6, sub-section (1) should be
revised by replacing the present the present phrase “either as respects the
deceased or as respects any other party”.
III Section 6(2) should be revised as follow: “the authority
of an arbitrator shall not be terminated by the death of any party to the
agreement”.
IV A new Section – Section 8A – should be inserted to
provide for the power of court to supply the vacancy in case of arbitrator or
umpire appointed by the court itself.
V Section 12 (1) should
be verbally amended, as recommended.
VI In Section 13, a new clause should be inserted as
follows: “Section 13 (aa). Process ex parte against any party who, without
sufficient cause and after dew notice, fails to attain personally or through
agent”.
VII In Section 14, two new sub-sections – 14 (2A) and 14 (2B)
– should be interested as recommended, to cover cases of death of the
arbitrator after making the award but before filling in and similar situations.
VIII Section 21 and the Heading of the Chapter should be revised as
recommended, to included appeals within its scope.
IX Section 24 should be revised as recommended, by the
addition of the word “appeal”.
X In Section 28. A proviso should be
inserted forbidding in respect of the time for making the award an extension
beyond one year, expect for special and adequate reasons to be recorded.[14]
CONCLUSION:-
ADR is a relatively new and rapidly changing field. It
holds considerable promise for Corps managers because it puts control of the
process and timing of dispute resolution back in the hands of line managers,
who possess greater flexibility in resolving disputes than exists in
litigation. New ADR techniques continue to be developed, and many variations in
format are being tried for existing techniques.
ADR can decrease the load on the litigation system by
ensuring that only major precedent-setting claims go the full litigation route.
ADR proceedings can lead to the parties signing a settlement agreement
ending their dispute. This agreement would be legally binding on the
parties. They are free to choose which country’s laws should apply.
Alternatively, the Neutral may have been asked to do no more than supply an
evaluation. In that case, the ADR proceedings end once the opinion is
presented in writing. It is up to the parties to decide what to do with it. One
of the parties may decide to withdraw by sending notification in writing to the
Neutral. This can only happen after the first discussion among the parties
and the Neutral, which is obligatory so that a reasonable assessment can
be made of ADR’s chances of success.
[1] LexisNexis Butterworths
‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’
[2] A board of persons
belonging to different sects and tribes but residing in the same locality.
[3] An assembly of tradesmen and
artisians belonging to different tribes but connected in some way with each
other.
[4] Assembly of members of a clan
and speak of the authority of these courts to decide law suits.
[5] Sabha was a house of
elders or an assembly of villages.
[6] Samati was the assembly
of the whole people.
[7] Chief Justice.
[8] Village judge/ head of the
village.
[9] Head of the Sabha, generally
the head of village or council of elderly people.
[10] Assemblies of learned men who
knew law.
[11] “The General Principles of
Hindu Jurisprudence” by Dr. Priyanath Sen.
[12] P.V. Kane’s ‘History of
Dharmashastras’( Vols. 5) Volume 3.
[13] ‘ A Primer on Alternative Dispute
Resolution’
Thank you for sharing such informative information about Alternative dispute resolution in India. This is very helpful blog on Alternative dispute resolution in India. I will come here again for getting more information.
ReplyDelete