Need For Adr India

2/14/2021 The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a comparative analysis with The United Kingdom.
e United Kingdom. - Indian Legal Solution


Indian Legal Solution

Est. 2017
You are Here Home  Legal Articles 

The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a
comparative analysis with The United Kingdom.

https://indianlegalsolution.com/the-need-of-adr-and-odr-system-in-india-with-a-comparative-analysis-with-the-united-kingdom/ 1/107
2/14/2021 The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a comparative analysis with The United Kingdom. - Indian Legal Solution
The need of ADR and ODR system in 

India with a comparative analysis with
The United Kingdom.
 August 18, 2018  50 min read
The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a

comparative analysis with The United Kingdom
Author : Mr. Gautam Matani,
Legal Manager at MKU Ltd.
LLM from School of Law, University of Leeds, England.
Supervised by – Dr Iyiola Solanke
ABSTRACT
ADR is a mechanism which is used widely in UK to resolve

disputes and if it is implemented in India on a large scale the
it can help reduce the burden on courts in India. In India more
than 20 million cases are pending in the courts of India and

the use of ADR can reduce the burden on courts. In the UK


under the CPR the ADR is made an obligatory mechanism to
be used to resolve the dispute at the rst step between the
parties. The Solicitor regulatory code makes the solicitors to
do the needful by informing the client about the various
methods of ADR and to use them to resolve their con ict
through an alternative means rather than litigation. However,
India lacks the statutory authority relating to ADR. There are
less training centres for the lawyers to undergo mediation
training whereas in UK the legal framework encourages the
ADR mechanism. The ADR system in UK is the one which
encourages ADR in every dispute and makes sure that rst
resort to resolving disputes should be ADR. The courts in UK
are not overburdened with the backlog of cases and there is
speedy justice and disputes are resolved cheaply whereas in
India there has been a backlog of cases and speedy justice is
not possible. Hence, the system of ADR adopted by UK
should be used in India so that ADR can be implemented on
a large scale and burden on courts can be reduced.
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS



ADR- Alternative Dispute Resolution

ODR- Online Dispute Resolution
UK- United Kingdom
UNCITRAL -The United Nations Commission on
International Trade Law
NCAIR- National Center for Automated Information
Research
ISDLS- Institute for the Study and Development of Legal
Studies
MCPC- Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee
TLCEODRI- Techno Legal Centre of Excellence for Online
Dispute Resolution in India
CBI- Confederation of British Industry
NHS- National Health Services
EMP- Elder Mediation Project
ICT- Information and Communication Technology
C2C- Consumer to Consumer
B2C- Buyer to Consumer
EU- European Union
ICADR- The International Centre of Alternative Dispute
Resolution



LIST OF STATUTES
Bengal Regulation 1772

Civil Procedure Code 1859
English Arbitration Act 1889
Arbitration Act 1940
Geneva Protocol 1923
Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards 1927
Foreign Awards Act 1961
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996
Industrial Disputes Act 1947
Legal Services Authority Act 1987
Civil Procedure Code (Amendment Act 2002)
Family Courts Act 1984
Indian Evidence Act 1872
Civil procedure Rules 1999

Contracts of Employment Act 1963


Redundancy Payments Act 1965
Industrial Relations Act 1971
Trade Union and Labour Relations Act 1974
The Solicitors Code 2007
Mediation Rules 2003
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGMENT…………………………………………………………….02
ABSTRACT………………………………………………………………………….03
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS……………………………………………………….04
LIST OF STATUTES……………………………………………………………….05
Chapter 1 – Overview

Introduction………………………………………………………………………08-09

Research Methodology…………………………………………………………….09
Aim of Research………………………………………………………………..09-10
Research Questions……………………………………………………………….10
Chapter 2 – Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Study in

General
History……………………………………………………………………………11-12
Types of ADR……………………………………………………………………12-13
Online Dispute Resolution……………………………………………………..14-

17
Need and Growth of ADR and

ODR…………………………………………..18-19
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………19-20
Chapter 3 – ADR and India


Introduction…………………………………………………………………………21

History of ADR in India…………………………………………………………21-

25
Law of ADR in India…………………………………………………………….25-30
Law of ODR in India…………………………………………………………….30-31
What Needs to be
done?………………………………………………………………….31-33
Pro’s and Con’s…………………………………………………………………33-35
Need for more centers and training for lawyers and

personnel……………….35
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………….36
Chapter 4 – ADR and the United Kingdom
Introduction……………………………………………………………………..37-39
Legal Framework of ADR………………………………………………………39-

42

Legal Framework of ODR………………………………………………………42-


43
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………43-44
Chapter 5 – India and UK: What the comparison shows?
Research Findings……………………………………………………………..45-46
Research Analysis………………………………………………………………46-47
Chapter 6 – Conclusions and Recommendations
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………48
Recommendation………………………………………………………………48-51
Conclusion………………………………………………………………………51-53
BIBLIOGRAPHY………………………………………………………………..54-56



Chapter 1
Overview
INTRODUCTION
A dispute has been and will be a recurring part of socio-

legalexistence of humans. Seen as result of varied and most
often con icting individual rights, duties, perspectives,
interests, understanding and fears, these disputes have
played a signi cant role in the development of society and
law in particular. The part purpose of system of justice, and
rightly so, has been for the settlement of dispute amongst
individuals, amongst states and between individual with
states. These con icts, on principle, arise out of
disagreements on the point of law or fact, varying from
circumstance to circumstance. Sometimes we ought to run
into disagreement with other individuals, when we have been
deprived of justice, or when some individual hurt us, a

dispute arises, which is dealt by different individuals in


different manner.
Individuals disputes are time consuming, emotionally

draining, and they make us contact with those peoples who
might not be in our preferred lists, this might consume our
time and deviate us from the work we ought to be doing. For
a person under dispute the common goal becomes the
resolution of the dispute. A society also sees the dispute as a
costly affair. In terms of society a dispute should be avoided if
possible, if cannot then it should be resolved quickly. But if all
the disputes are avoided then the society would be
suppressed and wrongs would happen in the society and
injustice would prevail. At the macro- level, the world is full of
injustice and the abuse of power takes place but disputes
arising can lead us to the path of change. At the macro level
where the disputes can be a part of positive social change
but at micro- level when a person enters into dispute within
the household, or with the neighborhood the disputes can be
burdensome and a costly affair[1].

ADR stands for Alternative Dispute Resolution, a system


which is now gaining importance as a way to resolve
con icts in the society. This system is parallel to the court
system prevailing in the world. It sometimes involved the
court system but its emphasis is on the parties who are in
dispute and the method they choose for resolving the
dispute. ADR has gained much popularity over the years and
it is preferred by most people around the world in resolving
their disputes. This system has been in practice informally in
many parts of the world but now it has been legalized by
many countries around the world, as there are many
advantages of this system which we will discuss in detail
further in the following chapters.
The purpose of this dissertation is to understand the basic

mechanism of Alternative Dispute Resolution in India and UK,
and to understand the modern working of ADR and ODR
mechanisms in UK. Moreover, to lay the emphasis as to how
the present legal system of India can be amended in order to
reduce the burden of courts by utilizing the mechanisms and
legal statutes in UK.


RESEARCHMETHODOLOGY

The research is conceptual and comparative which includes

the analysis of the existing statutes in India and UK, analysis
of the cases which can be resolved through ADR system
rather than litigation, and comparison with UK in regards to
India, so an ADR system can be incorporated on a large basis
in India to reduce the burden on courts. The approach taken
is desk research where
AIM OF THIS RESEARCH
The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of the

ADR system in India and comparing the legality of the
existing statutes with comparison with the United Kingdom.
This research is focused on Indian legality and how the
burden on the courts can be reduced through ADR system
and to make suggestions to build up an effective and ef cient
ADR mechanism in India.

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

1. How will ADR reduce the burden on the courts in India?

2. Is ADR a speedy and effective method of resolving
disputes in a country like India?
3. Does absence of full- edged Bar for ADR prevented ADR
proceedings to be carried on smoothly?
4. Does the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 is and
effective dispute resolution statue?
5. Will the enforcement of ADR act in India be of help like in
U.K.? If yes, what new legal statues need to be enforced in
India.

Chapter 2

Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Study in General
History of ADR
The history of ADR can be traced back to 500BC, an ADR

system called the Panchayat System was used in India, also
the European law merchant had their own kind of system for
mercantile disputes around about 1000BC. The Ancient
Egyptian Amarna system used diplomacy in international
relations in 1400BC. Also, King Alfonso the Wise of Spain in
1263, used a method of binding arbitration with the
publication of Siete Partides. However, the rst statutory
provision for Arbitration was provided in 1632 by the Irish.
The rst president of the U.S.A placed an arbitration clause in
his will in 1770. In the year 1886 General Howard had
instituted arbitration clause in employment agreements
between former slaves and former owners. The rst act of
ADR was passed in 1888 by the United States, for speci c
railway labor disputes. [2]



The traces of present methods under ADR can be found in

the history. Following are some examples : –
The Bushmen of Kalahari
The Bushmen is a society of hunter- gatherers living in

Namibia and Botswana. They have many disputes arising
out of food, land and mates. The disputes are solved by the
society as a whole where all the men and all the women sit
down and listen to both sides and solve the dispute. This
process involves mediation and consensus building.[3]
Hawaiian Islanders
These islanders belong to the Polynesian ancestry and solve

disputes through traditional methods involving reconciliation.
The parties to the dispute are referred to a leader who on
hearing both the sides try to resolve the dispute. [4]

There are many places like The Kpelle of Central Liberia


where family disputes which are small in nature are resolved
through a moot court system. The Abkhazian of the
Caucasus Mountains in the former Soviet Union, the disputes
are resolved through mediators, where the elder members of
the family act as mediators. The Yoruba of Nigeria resolve
disputes by putting it forward to the mogaji, the lineage head
and the baale, an elderly head of the district. It is a mark of
shame for those families who resort to the court for resolving
disputes. These are the societies which resort to dispute
settlement through traditional ways which are now coined
under Alternative Dispute Resolution.[5]
TYPES OF ADR
Mediation
It is a decision making process, in which the parties are

assisted by a third person who attempts to resolve the
dispute and assist the parties to reach an outcome which is
bene cial for both the parties. The process in involved in
making the situation clear between the parties, help them 
establish communication, identify the needs and interests of


the parties and assist the parties in decision making by
providing a model of solution to the dispute. However,
mediation is used for de ning the dispute this process is
referred to as scoping, which helps in identifying the problem
and then focus on resolving it. [6] This method of ADR is a
voluntary method, the parties resort to mediation with
consensus and they have a choice to choose the mediator.
Mediator is a neutral, independent person who acts as a
mediator for the dispute. The decision that is reached has the
consent by both the parties and is made into an agreement
which is legally binding.
Negotiation
It is a method in which a third party is involved in resolving

the dispute. The two parties to the dispute try to
communicate with each other through different means, so
that there is some medium of communication which takes
place. In the communication the parties can mention their
goals they want to achieve by having a communication and
then they can decide the means of achieving those goals. The
parties have to look into different options available to resolve

their dispute and achieve whatever is desired. Moreover, this


mechanism involves a third person who is not a party to the
dispute but who acts as an adjudicator in the matter, who
listens to the arguments of both the parties and give a
decision which is favorable to both. The adjudicator has
legitimate powers to decide the case. The adjudicator is
appointed by the agreement of both the parties and the
decision made by the adjudicator is not binding on the
parties.[7] The negotiation mechanism takes place only when
both the parties have agreed to resolve the dispute through
ADR method rather than litigation. However, negotiation can
also be used if there is a multi party dispute over an issue.
After the decision has been given and both the parties agree
to it then an agreement is made which is duly signed by both
the parties which is enforceable in the court of law. The
process of negotiation is a valuable form of ADR as it helps
the parties to communicate and keep their views on the
dispute and the goal of resolving the dispute is the primary
concern rather than whose mistake is in the dispute.


ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION


The word ODR stands for Online Dispute Resolution. The use
of internet increased drastically in 1990s[8]. In the year 1998
National Center for Technology and Dispute Resolution
founded by the University of Massachusetts, where
professors of legal studies Ethan Katsh and Janet and Rifkin
with a grant from Hewlett Foundation started their research.
It was clear that online activities had begun on drastic phase
and being a highly creative and active space it was clear that
it won’t be harmonious for a long time. After the center was
created eBay asked the center to conduct a pilot project for
the disputes online between the buyer and the seller, to know
whether they can be mediated or not. The results were
positive and in two weeks time 150 disputes were mediated.
[9] This led to the development of online dispute resolution
system. Online disputes started with the result of increase in
the usage of internet and e-commerce transactions. This led
to the creation of online portal for the resolution of disputes
which started in United Kingdom for the rst time.

According to a computer scientist David Gelenter cyberspace


should be viewed as “mirror world”. In this cyberspace people
will engage, interact with schools, banks, stores and various
other kinds of institutions on a large basis. In the future
people will use of more of internet or the world wide space
and the interactions in these cyberspaces though being
virtual but would be real. People will resort to them as they
will help them in de ning their identities and with the use of
exotic headgear and other modern equipment’s it seems
increasingly realistic. This concept of “mirror world” will at
some point lead to disputes which will originate online. The
People through this concept will interact, express opinions,
form relationships, make transactions online, meet each other
etc., and which will lead to online disputes arising out of this
mirror world. In this environment there would be disputes
related to physical world and which in process lead us to the
origin of Online Dispute Resolution for resolving disputes of
the physical world. [10]
Cyberspace is a place of new ideas and innovations which

will help us ease our work in the modern world, where people
can participate in the new marketplace. It will help in building
bonds, exchange and encounter new things and work 
together in new fashioned way. This space will lead us to an


expansion of economic culture, innovations, new ideas and
restrains in the cyberspace are less then the physical world.
But these bene cial things also lead us to an expansion of
disputes occurring online. When people will interact, share
their opinions, participate, there would be con ict of interests
and which would lead to disputes. The modern day World
Wide Web has developed legal statues relating to copyright,
privacy, but it also creates an emergence to form a statutory
regulation for disputes which would be initiated online.[11]
In the last few years the disputes arising online have been
increased at a drastic phrase and using informal means to
resolve the dispute is not appreciated. The need arises when
such disputes arise in a large scale then for governing the
disputes or resolving them are there suf cient means and
legal statues and governing bodies for such disputes. There
has been an increase in the population of people who are
using the cyberspace to trade, engage in relations, share
views, buy products and such disputes cannot be resorted to
ongoing legal statues.


The disputes in cyberspace will continue to increase, as the


interactions taking place in the cyberspace are broadening.
The approach to con ict resolution is also important as it
depends upon what the context of the con ict is and how it
can be addressed. In the virtual world, people can enter and
participate no matter where we are, who we are and this is
the reason that creative and commercial activities are
increasing in cyberspace as the hindrances in the real world
are overcome with the virtual world.[12]
So the need of ODR came into being with following projects

being worked upon by different universities which we will
discuss in further context-
1. The Virtual Magistrate Project

2. The University of Maryland Online Mediation Project
The University of Massachusetts Online Ombuds Of ce
In the year 1994, ecommerce was on the beginning phrase

and people were unaware about eBay, Amazon or Google. 
But with the increase in the use of Internet or the W.W.W.,


the need for ODR came into being. ODR emerged as a
challenge to the existence legal system and to ll in the gaps
for an existing legal system, where the legal statues were not
present. The rst spam case was recorded in April 1994
where the Federal Trade Commission brought its rst Internet
fraud case. The range of activity till then was limited and the
disputes arising were also in limit, but the need for sustained
ODR came with the growing number of disputes arising out
of online activities which made the NCAIR (National Center
for Automated Information Research) to organize a
conference on ODR in 1996 and provided the funding of the
above three projects. [13]
The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law

(UNCITRAL) has helped in the development of ODR. It lays
down the relevant documents, links, reports related to
national and international schemes. It has laid down the
principles of use of online ADR. Another body is the National
centre for Technology and Dispute Resolution which was
founded in 1998.[14] The ODR has grown over the least
decade and its focus has been on resolving the disputes
which occur in the e-commerce market. 


The development of ODR has made available the following

modes online which are: –
Assisted Negotiation- In this the parties submit their blind

bids to the ODR platform, as being submitted blindly it is
considered to be a fair settlement to reach to an agreement.
In this case, if one gures coincide with the amounts
introduced by the other party, the ODR platform informs the
other party that an agreement can be reached on such an
amount. In this case, the software provides the technical
assistance. [15]
Online Mediation-In this the third person act as a mediator, in

this the parties submit to their dispute and the mediator
communicates with them through emails, or through private
chats or through cyber conferencing. The mediator provides
them with a solution. Their services also offer phone support.
However, if the dispute affects a large number of people then
the third party is referred to as facilitator. The role of
facilitator is to make sure that all the parties have the chance 
to keep their views and arguments and then a solution is


decided upon which is agreeable by all the parties. [16]
The ODR has grown up drastically and is providing all the

ADR facilities online, so that a person can resolve his dispute
by sitting at their home. It is helping the consumers to trust
the e-commerce business and indulge into it and the disputes
which are being created through e-commerce system are
also being resolved online. This is the new phase of legal
framework in the world where the disputes are being
resolved online and through and alternative means not
through litigation.
NEED AND GROWTH OF ADR AND ODR
The ADR system was used in the past as discussed before

but it was not legally recognized in any legal statute. But
with the growing burden on the court system in the world the
need to an alternative system to resolve dispute was high in
demand. So it led to the establishment of alternative dispute

resolution mechanism around the world. The need arose of


this mechanism as ADR mechanism is a faster and ef cient
method of resolving disputes.
The Pound Conference on the Causes of Popular

dissatisfaction with the Courts in 1976 evidenced a lot of
dissatisfaction among people regarding the court system.
The dissatisfaction was due to increase in the litigation
system, expensiveness and lack of timely resolution of
disputes. However, according to the two school theory, one
school argued the need to ADR as it can reduce the over
litigiousness in the society and reduce the high cost
associated with it. The other school had a view that ADR
mechanism can provide speedy and an increased access to
justice. Moreover, National Institute for Dispute Resolution
was created in 1982 seeing the growing needs for an ADR
system. These schools gave a civil system a new turn, a
social reform came under the process which we know as the
dispute resolution movement which led to the initiation of an
ADR mechanism. [17]

Analyzing Blackstones, Rudolf observes that the common


law courts also nd this method to be speedy and capable of
resolving dispute in many cases. This method is a traditional
method used to resolve disputes, and in the views of
Blackstone if both the parties agree to resolve the dispute
through ADR then it should be encouraged as it is ef cient
and effective than the common law system. Moreover, in
seventeenth and eighteenth century arbitration was used as
a common tool for resolving disputes in England. The people
were frustrated of adhering to court system to resolve
disputes. Also, as the record study by Sharpe concluded that
those involved in suits were anxious to settle the dispute
outside the court.[18]
The increase in the number of cases as in California saw an

increase of 45% during 1974 to 1985. Likewise, it took thirty-
six months to get a trial in Supreme Court of Los Angeles
where there were 38,524 cases pending. It also led to the
increase in the state expenditures as to pay the judicial
positions in the court. [19] This is the root cause as to the
need of an alternative system being adopted by nation where
speedy trial and access to justice can be accessed ef ciently,
effectively and easily. Hence, the ADR mechanism has 
substantially grown over few years and the need is to


establish such mechanism so that the people have an
opportunity to seek redressal from an alternative means
which is speedy and less expensive.
CONCLUSION
The ADR system has grown in several nations around the

world in over few years. This mechanism of resolving
disputes is effectively cheaper and faster. It is ef cient in
settling disputes, providing greater access to justice, a
voluntary system and involves local people. In ADR the
situation is more of a win win solution then on who is right
and wrong. The ADR mechanism is still facing challenges
whether to incorporate ADR methods as a legal statute.
In the case of ODR the mechanism is a very useful one but it

is not being used by the people so commonly as less people
are aware about it. Moreover, it is not available in every
country, also the people ought to have knowledge about the

process of using the software and indulging into online


activities of registering the complain and then into
communication with a third person who will offer a solution
to the dispute or try to resolve the dispute. But both the
mechanisms are growing and those who know about them
are resorting to them as a means to get speedy justice and
cheap resolution of their dispute.
CHAPTER 3
ADR and India
INTRODUCTION
To start with ADR in India, it is quiet evident that

directstatutory and regulatory framework is in place
presently. However, in recent times of decades there has
been a signi cant development specially in the past decade
which were pulled and pushed by a common demand and

desire to use ADR as a tool of dispute resolution. Around the


world, demand has been crucially based upon the rising
culture of settlement, particularly out of court. The whole idea
has arguablybeen based upon the present lack of
infrastructure in the judicial adjudication, and ineffective
administrative structure to compensate the effects primarily
inclined towards the negative side. Some phrases and
realization of ADR can be seen in the family law system and
labor law system. The most prominent formal framework for
ADR has been provided by the supreme court in the case of
Salem Bar Association v Union of India.Further the
Government of India, law commission has proposed several
recommendation in its report ‘Need for Justice-dispensation
through ADR etc’[20].Lastly India has a great opportunity
and a golden chance to converge its ADR system to the
foundation principles dispute resolution all around the world.
HISTORY OF ADR IN INDIA
As observed by Mulla[21], antiquated India started its quest

for laws since Vedic times around 4000 to 1000 years B.C., it
is conceivable that a portion of the Vedic songs were made 
at a period sooner than 4000 B.C. The early Aryans were


extremely lively and unsophisticated individuals loaded with
satisfaction forever and had behind them times of
acculturated presence and thought. They principally conjured
the unwritten law of perfect shrewdness, reason and
reasonability, which as per them administered paradise and
earth. This was one of the principal starting rationalities of
intercession – Wisdom, Reason and Prudence, which
beginning logic is even now honed in western nations.
Towards the end of the Vedic age, philosophical and
legitimate verbal confrontations were carried on with the end
goal of evoking truth, in congregations and parishads, which
are currently portrayed as gatherings.[22]
The time of Dharma Shastra’s took after the Vedic age, amid
which period educational law specialists built up the
rationality of fundamental laws. Their learned talks perceived
existing utilizations and traditions of various groups, which
included determination of question by non-ill-disposed
indigenous techniques. One illustration is the tribunal
propounded and set up by a splendid researcher
Yagnavalkya, known as KULA, which resolve the
disputesbetween individuals, family, group, tribes. The times 
of Yagnavalkya witnessed a phenomenal development and


advancement of exchange, industry and trade and the Indian
dealers are said to have cruised the seven oceans, sowing
the seeds of International Commerce.[23] These illustrations
help in determining the old Indian law and different ADR
methods that were used in historic times to resolve disputes.
ADR is a system of dispute resolution which is alternative to

the usual and common judicial method. ADR was established
by the State. The concept of parties to a dispute settling their
dispute in a binding manner by reference to a person or
persons of their choice or private tribunals was well known to
ancient and medieval India.[24] Appeals were also often
provided against the decisions of such persons or tribunals to
the courts of judges appointed by the king and ultimately to
the king himself.[25]
However, the law of arbitrations owes its elaboration to the

British rule in India, the series of regulations framed by the
East India Company or the British Government incorporated
Bengal Regulation of 1772, Civil Procedure Codes enacted in
1859,1877 and 1882. These regulations gave the power to 
the people to deal with the cases of arbitration without the


intervention of the court.[26]
The rst Indian Arbitration Act was enacted in 1899. This act
was largely based on the English Arbitration Act of 1889. The
scope of this act was con ned to arbitration by agreement
without the intervention of the court. The act also contained
an alternative method whereby the parties to a dispute or
any of them could le their arbitral agreement before a court
which, after a certain procedure, referred the matter to an
arbitrator. 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. The Act dealt with three
kinds of arbitrations:
Arbitration without the intervention of the court.

Arbitration with the intervention of the court where there
is no suit pending.
Arbitration in suits.[27]
The ADR methods in India were common but not

documented of cially or did not hold any legal authority. 
Example The Panchayat system in which a group of ve


people were elected by the people of the particular village
and in case of any dispute the case was referred to the
Panchayat and the decision by the Panchayat was
considered to be nal. Arbitration acts were enacted to
resolve disputes in the past. Also, many International
Conventions came into force of which India became a part.
The Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses, 1923, came into

force on 28th July, 1924.The Geneva Convention on the
Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1927, came into force
on 25th July, 1929. India became a party to both the Protocol
and the Convention on 23rd October, 1937. For giving effect
to the obligations, India enacted the Arbitration (Protocol
And Convention) Act, 1937. India also became a party to the
New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of
Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 in the year 1960. For giving
effect to the obligations under this convention, India enacted
the Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act,
1961.[28]Thus prior to the commencement of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996,the law of arbitration in India was
contained in three enactments: the 1937 Act, the 1940 Act,

the 1961 Act. The act consolidates and amends the laws

relating to arbitration in India.
There are about twenty- ve million cases pending in different

courts in India. The subject matter of arrears of cases in
courts had engaged the attention of various Commissions
and Committees in India. The arrears committee knows as
the Malimath Committee, constituted by the Government of
India on the recommendations of the Chief Justices
conference made a number of recommendations in a report
submitted in 1990. Similarly, Law Commission of India
submitted as many as 16 reports containing
recommendations on various aspects of the frightful problem
of mounting arrears of cases in courts. The Malimath
Committee as also the Law Commission had then
recommended a number of alternative modes such as
arbitration, conciliation, and mediation for dispute resolution.
[29]
On 4th December, 1993, a meeting of the Chief Ministers and

Chief Justices was held under the chairmanship of the Prime
Minister of India to evolve a strategy for dealing with the 
congestion of cases in the courts. The meeting adopted a


resolution that sets forth ways and means to deal with the
arrears problems as fast as possible. While dealing with
arrears of cases in courts and tribunals, the resolution also
recommended that a number of disputes lent themselves to
resolution by alternative means such as arbitration,
mediation and negotiation. ADR was considered as as crucial
part of the legal system designed to meet the needs of
consumers of justice, especially in the context of recent
reforms in the economic sector.[30] The Government felt the
need of change in the system so they introduced the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, but within recent years
it had it drawbacks and it could not resolve the problem of
pending cases in India.
LAW OF ADR IN INDIA
The law of ADR in India has not been enacted, but the courts
recognize ADR in the eld of Arbitration. The rst act passed
was the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940 but the act was of not
much bene t. The act did not include any provision to resolve
any dispute between an Indian and non-Indian companies 
and moreover there was a delay in the settlement of


disputes. In such a crisis, India has undertaken many reforms
and a new act Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 was
enacted to remove such drawback. India also adopted the
United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, in
order to minimize the courts intervention in arbitration
process but it still lacks the main forms of ADR.[31]
The concept of conciliation in India was recognized rst time

under section 4 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947in which
the conciliation of cers were charged with the duty to
promote mediation for settling the disputes. The rst training
of the mediators was held in the year 2000 by American
trainer sent by the Institute for the study and Development of
Legal Systems(ISDLS).[32] There has been a committee
constituted i.e. Mediation and Conciliation Project
Committee(MCPC). This committee is involved in framing new
policies relating to mediation in India.
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 also contains

provision relating to conciliation in contractual matters
arising out of legal relationship. Out of the ADR methods 
which are being used, arbitration and conciliation have


received legislative recognition and the parties in their
commercial contacts invariably insert an arbitration clause to
refer their dispute or differences to arbitral tribunal for
settlement.
In the year 1999, the Indian Parliament passed the Civil

Procedure Code amendment by inserting section 89.The
section 89 A Code of Civil Procedure, 1908(Act No. V of
1908), allows parties to resolve to dispute through Mediation.
Its states as follows: ‘Except in a suit under the [Artha Rin
Adalat Ain, 2003 (Act No. 8 of 2003)], after ling of written
statement, if all the contesting parties are in attendance in
the Court in person or by their respective pleaders, [the Court
shall], by adjourning the hearing, mediate in order to settle
the dispute or disputes in the suit, or refer the dispute or
disputes in the suit to the engaged pleaders of the parties, or
to the party or parties, where no pleader or pleaders have
been engaged, or to a mediator from the panel as may be
prepared by the District Judge under sub-section (10), for
undertaking efforts for settlement through mediation’.[33]


The section 89B allows the parties to settle disputes through


Arbitration which is stated as: “If the parties to a suit, at any
stage of the proceeding, apply to the Court for withdrawal of
the suit on ground that they will refer the dispute or disputes
in the suit to arbitration for settlement, the Court shall allow
the application and permit the suit to be withdrawn; and the
dispute or disputes, thereafter, shall be settled in accordance
with Salish Ain, 2001 (Act No. 1 of 2001) so far as may be
applicable:
Provided that, if, for any reason, the arbitration proceeding

referred to above does not take place or an arbitral award is
not given, the parties shall be entitled to re-institute the suit
permitted to be withdrawn under this sub-section.”[34]
Judicial settlement is a con dential form of facilitative

mediation performed by a Judge other than the trial Judges to
whom the case is assigned for disposal. The Settlement
Judge serves as a facilitator to create a conducive
atmosphere for negotiations among the disputant parties.
First he holds session with each party separately and offers
an objective assessment of the case and suggests settlement 
options. Thereafter he holds joint sitting with the parties to


dispute and tries to make them agree for a consensual
settlement.
It would be pertinent to refer to the Civil Procedure Code

(Amendment) Act, 1999 in the context of Judicial Settlement
as an alternative dispute redressal mechanism. The provision
contained in section 89 of the Code is designed to enable the
Courts to bring about a settlement of dispute outside the
Court. [35]
‘SECTION 89. SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES OUTSIDE THE

COURT
Where it appears to the court that there exist elements of

a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the
court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give
them to the parties for their observations and after
receiving the observations of the parties, the Court may

reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer


the same for-
Arbitration;
Conciliation
Judicial settlement including settlement through Lok
Adalat; or
Where a dispute has been referred-

For arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall
apply as if the proceedings for arbitration of conciliation
were referred for settlement under the provisions of that
Act;
to Lok Adalat, the court shall refer the same to the Lok
Adalat in accordance with the provisions of sub-section
(1) of section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987
(30 of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply
in respect of the dispute referred to the Lok Adalat;
for judicial settlement, the court shall refer the same to a
suitable institution or person and such institution or person
shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the provisions
of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987)
shall apply as if the dispute were referred to a Lok Adalat
under the provisions of that Act;

For mediation, the court shall effect a compromise between


the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be
prescribed.’[36]
In India the parliament has enacted the Arbitration and

Conciliation Act, 1996[37] with a view to promote arbitration
but it does not includes mediation and negotiation. It
includesconciliation in Part III of the Act. The culture of ADR
has not been included in the Bar, the bench and the
Arbitration community. With the phrase of time there has
been an immense increase in the number of cases in the
court and this has overburdened the courts. The cases which
can be solved within a period of few months, last for years.
The method of ADR is present in the Civil Procedure Code
(CPC) Act, 1999 in the section 89.
In modern India the system of conciliation prevails under the

Industrial Disputes Act 1947 which is concerned with
industrial disputes. Under this act a Board of Conciliation
was constituted headed by the conciliation of cer which is
appointed by the Government. If a dispute arises under the
I.D. Act, and the disputed parties i.e. the employer and the 
workmen agree to refer the dispute to arbitration, both


parties can refer to arbitration under Section 10A of the I.D.
Act. A copy of the agreement is forwarded to the conciliation
of cer under section 10A(3)of the I.D. Act. The duty of the
conciliation of cer should settle the dispute through
conciliation in a fair and amicable manner under section
12(2)if the I.D. Act. The conciliation is a fast process as under
section 12(6)of the I.D. Act, the report of the conciliation
proceedings should be submitted to the government within
fourteen days or shorter period as xed by the government.
Under section 13(5) when a dispute is referred to a board,

whether the dispute is resolved or it is not resolved the board
has a time period of two months to submit its report to the
government. The courts also have their duties to follow under
section 15of the I.D. Act. It has to submit the report to the
government whenever a matter is reported to Labor Court,
Tribunal or National tribunal. The award of settlement in the
course of conciliation is binding on the parties to the
agreement under section 18of the I.D. Act. The proceedings
under the board and by the conciliation of cer can be kept
con dential, if the rm, person, company or trade union has
requested in writing under section 21 of the I.D. Act.

Family law is the another area of law where ADR has been

recognized in India. Under section 5 of the Family Courts Act,
1984 the Government is required to associated with the
social welfare agencies to resolve a family dispute and reach
a peaceful settlement by way for negotiation. The
Government should appoint counsellors so that mediation
process can be carried out smoothly in family disputed under
section 6of the F.C. Act 1984. The family courts should take
effective steps in the settlement of disputes and may adjourn
the litigation period as it may deem t to effect such
settlement under section 9of the F.C. Act. The F.C. Act, 1984
was established on the basis to promote conciliation in family
disputes and provide speedy settlement of disputes.
The other statue which gives importance to ADR mechanism

is the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987. This act has given
recognition to a new system of settlement in India i.e. through
Lok Adalats. The Lok Adalats are to be conducted by State
Authority under section 7, by District Authority under section
10, by The Taluka Legal Services Committee under section
11B of the Act. Under section 20(1)(i)(b), if any party to the
dispute makes an application to the court for referring the
case to the Lok Adalat and if the court sees that there are 
chances of settlement and the court nds that the Lok Adalat

has the cognizance, then it can refer the case to the Lok
Adalat. The decree passed by the court is deemed to be a
decree of a civil court under section 21(1). The award made
by the court shall be binding on both the parties of the court
and an appeal against the award shall not lie to any court
under section 21(2). The Lok Adalat is a court of the people
where they can settle disputes but has the same powers as
vested in the Civil Courts under the Code of Civil Procedure
1908 (C.P.C.) as mentioned in section 22(1).
It is the duty of the Permanent Lok Adalat to help the parties

during conciliation proceedings to reach an amicable
settlement under section 22(C)(5). The Permanenet Lok
Adalat during the proceedings if thinks that there is a
solution to the dispute then it should give their observations
to the parties and incase the parties agree to settle then an
award is passed by the Permanent Lok Adalat as mentioned
under section 22 (C)(7), and if the parties fail to reach a
settlement then the Permanent Lok Adalat shall decide the
dispute under section 22(C)(8). The Permanent Lok Adalat
while deciding a dispute should decide the dispute on the
principals of natural justice, objectivity, fair play, equity and 
shall not be bound by the C.P.C.,1908 and the Indian


Evidence Act, 1872. The Lok Adalats have become famous
and many people resort to them to solve disputes as the
functioning is quick, cheap and no appeal lies against the
decree awarded by them.
LAW OF ODR IN INDIA
India is witnessing the key change in its economy. It has been

attracting FDI (Foreign Direct Investment) around the world.
But in the world of e-commerce it lacks the main criteria of
resolving disputes online. However, it has an Arbitration and
Conciliation Act 1996 but it does not contains any mode or
method related to dispute resolution online. There is not
statutory authority or law related to online disposal of cases.
It lacks the basic infrastructure and legal module of resolving
disputes online. India is already suffering from backlog of
cases and millions of cases are pending in the courts of India.
There is delay in resolving of disputes and it has become a
costly affair to indulge into litigation for disputes smaller in
nature.



The Act has not been able to bring the desired results as
expected. It is now felt that the act should be amended
keeping in mind the information and communication
technology driven business models. The techno legal centre
of excellence for online dispute resolution in India (TLCEODRI)
has launched a beta version of ODR platform that can be
helpful in resolving disputes online for national and
international stakeholders. Moreover, there is a special
service created for Online Arbitration or Cyber Arbitration
where parties can submit their dispute to the platforms of
TLCEODRI. Once you register your dispute then a tribunal will
be appointed and would proceed to deal with the dispute.
These are things would be soon available on the platform
and is under process. However, due to the lack of clear legal
statutes in India the e-commerce websites do not follow the
laws in India because of which the consumers have to suffer.
[38]Henceforth, India lacks the basic ODR platform for
resolution of disputes online. It needs to amend its laws as
there are no laws relating to ODR in India.
WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE?




The present legal system in India can be seen as a part of

colonial legacy. The constitution of India under article 39-
APart IV, contains a directive principle which holds that the
State will ensure that the legal system operates in a manner
so as to promote justice to all and to ensure that no citizen is
denied the opportunities of securing justice by reason of
economic or any other disability. But the ground reality is that
the law hardly reaches the vulnerable sections of the society
where majority of the people are illiterate, rustic and rural
and are ignorant about existence of their legal rights and
remedies. And those who are aware nd it dif cult to get
them translated into reality because of the legal ordeals one
has to undergo in the process of litigation.
Delay in the administration is not con ned to India alone but

in India the situation is at its worse state. Malimath
Committee was made on Arrears in court which undertook a
comprehensive review of the working of the court system,
particularly, all aspects of arrears and Law’s delay and made
various useful recommendations for reducing litigation and
making justice readily accessible to the people at the

minimum cost of time and money. This committee underlined


the need of alternative dispute resolution mechanism such as
mediation, conciliation, arbitration, Lok Adalats etc. as a
viable alternative to the conventional Court litigation. These
alternative adjudicatory techniques would not only provide
cheap and speedy justice to the needy but would go a long
way in restoring the con dence of the people and
establishing Rule of Law as contemplated by the Constitution
of India.[39]
As a solution to the problem of over-burdened Courts, a

number of tribunals were established in India, some of them
being the Industrial Tribunal, Railway Claims Tribunal, The
Central and State Administrative Tribunal, Public Service
Tribunal, Consumer Forum and so on. Even after the
formation of these conjestion and delays in courts persisted
unabated thereby defeating the cause of justice.Particularly
civil litigation in India is known for pendency of cases ooded
by adjournments, revisions, appeals, cross-appeals etc. On
an average a civil case takes about 5-8 years for its nal
disposal and cases are not wanting when civil cases have
lingered in the courts for even 15 or 20 years for reason or
another. Frequent adjournments on imsy grounds is perhaps 
one of the major causes for overburdening of Courts and


delay in disposal of suits.[40]
The noted jurist Mr. N.A. Palkhivala attributing this cause to

legal profession inter-alia, observed:“The fault is mainly of
legal professionals. We ask for adjournments on the most
imsy grounds. If the judge does not readily grant
adjournment, he is deemed highly unpopular. I think it is the
duty of the legal profession to make sure that it cooperates
with the judiciary in ensuring that justice is administered
speedily and expeditiously, it is duty of which we are totally
oblivious.”[41]
PRO’S AND CON’S
“Let us never negotiate out of fear but let us never fear to

negotiate.”[42] states John F Kennedy. This notion is the
sound foundation of the International Centre for Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ICADR).We are a litigious society. It is
revealed that a quarter million cases are led in the courts
each year and almost a 100 million in the fty state courts.
That is about one for every person, although many of these 
deals with relatively minor matters, about 12 million are led


in the major courts. “Litigation has become the nation’s
secular religion”, commented a contemporary expert, J.K.
Lieberman.[43]
In today’s scenario the law is universally pervasive and

present everywhere. It is the basis and in uences almost all
actions and omissions or other activities in a society. Today,
all things are regulated directly or indirectly so it will be every
right to say ‘Ours is a law drenched age. Because we are
constantly inventing new and better ways of bumping into
one another, we seek an orderly means of dulling the blows
and repairing the damage. We have never heard of courts
temporarily closing their doors against litigation on the
ground of case-load but it appears to have happened in
U.S.A’[44]
However, now the scenario is that the newly built court

rooms have remained unused for lack of judges, judicial
vacancies not being lled. Plans for new facilities and
equipment replacement have been cancelled. Prisons are
overcrowded, forcing the early release of inmates. Court 
employees have suffered massive reduction, payless vacation


days, etc. The result is that there is a threat to an
independent judiciary in USA.[45]Moreover the situation in
India is more adverse as there is increase in number of
lawyers and litigants but lack judges and number of courts
which has made the litigation process very slow. As litigation
becomes slower it leads to litigants spending more amount
on the cases to get the disputes resolved early as stated by
Gross.[46]
Moreover, because of this disproportionate strength of the

rival parties, the rich and powerful can litigate easily and get
their disputes resolved by paying off and making the
opponent loose. The poor does not have enough means and
money to litigate the cases so they get the raw end of the
stick in legal matters. The lawyers get better result for their
clients who pay them more and lawyers do not work as hard
as for the proper clients as compared to the rich ones as
state Moore.[47]
These are the drawbacks of the present legal system in India.

There are more problems related to the education system of 
law in India. Those who are well educated are not willing to

join the judicial services due to less money in the profession.
There is de ciency of good lawyers in the country and
moreover if there are few who will not work for the poor or
for the justice system in India. The law students are not
educated to the fullest of the laws which prevail in India and
law being a eld is updated every month and to know the
laws the education system must change. It is high time
seeing the condition of Indian judiciary where the cases are
pending in millions that the lawyers should be educated and
the new culture of alternative means of resolving disputes
should be created so that people can resolve their disputes
through mediation, negotiation, conciliation.
NEED FOR MORE CENTRES AND TRAINING FOR LAWYERS

AND PERSONNEL
There are few centers of mediation in India, one being in New

Delhi which are not suf cient means to educate the lawyers
and the people. Such centers should be open in each and
every district of the state so that the people can get to know
about this dispute resolution mechanism and they resort to it. 
The lawyers should also be given training and information


regarding the alternative dispute resolution mechanism so
that they can tell the clients when they come that there is an
alternative way through which this dispute can be resolved.
As of today, practically none is trained in these skills. The
emphasis should be given to this system so that it can be
available to the people easily.
Moreover, professional training of the lawyers is the key to its

success and there should be a legal statute made on this so
that the people can be made aware about. This mechanism
should be headed separately by the Bar Council of India. The
lawyers should be interested in resolving dispute through this
process. They should make this method effective and
convenient so that there is less delay in getting justice and
less cost involved. It is the time that the Bar Council of India
starts profession courses for the lawyers who would wish to
engage themselves in these new procedures so as to make
them more ef cient to use this mechanism. If such a
mechanism is used then it will reduce the burdens on court
and help in the resolution of this disputes speedily and
cheaply.



CONCLUSION
As seen from the above scenario there is a lot of burden on

courts in India and the need of an ADR law is very important.
In the year 1996 S.C. of India under the guidance of the then
Chief Justice, Mr. A.M. Ahmadi carried an Indo-U.S. joint
study. The basis of the study was to nd a solution to the
problems of delay in justice in the India Judicial System, in
which High Court was asked to appoint a team of study to
work with the delegates of The Institute for Study and
Development of Legal System(ISDLS), an institution based in
San Francisco. The team gathered information from every
state and then analyzed it and proposed some amendments
for the Indian Scenario.[48]
Moreover, Mediation has been given a legal sanction but only

through courts. Mediation and conciliation centres have been 
setup in few parts of the country and courts have started


referring the matters to such centres. In this mechanism court
is the central institution involved for solving disputes. It is felt
by the Indian Judicial system that ADR systems under the
control, guidance and supervision of the court will have more
acceptance and will function smoothly.[49]
The mediation process in India is carried out through the

committee established by the Supreme Court. The study is
being conducted by the National University of Juridical
Sciences in Kolkata to study the ADR mechanism. The
government is eager to promote ADR mechanism to resolve
disputes but the parties to the dispute prefer judicial process
as there is not statutory backing to the ADR mechanism.[50]
CHAPTER 4

ADR andThe United Kingdom


INTRODUCTION
The rst act of arbitration was passed in 1698 by the English

Parliament, to resolve disputes through arbitration.This act
created a way for other ADR methods to be used for
resolving disputes. The encouragement by Blackstone on the
used of arbitration to resolve disputes was a very popular in
England.
However, the Woolf Reforms led to the adoption of Civil

Procedure Rules 1999. But 2006 saw the introduction and
standardization of the ADR mechanism into the UK legal
framework. In the CPR it is speci cally mentioned ‘the courts
take the view that litigation should be a last resort.’ Lord
Justice Dayson said in the Appeal decision in Halsey v Milton
Keynes General NHS Trust, ‘Mediation often succeeds where
previous attempts to settle have failed.’ The role of ADR in
civil justice system was highlighted in the Review of Civil

Litigation Costs: Final Report by Lord Justice Jackson’s in


January 2010.[51]
The system of ADR has many advantages in the civil justice

system. The growth of ADR has seen the disputes being
resolved through mediation, negotiation and conciliation in
the UK landscape and the courts are not overburdened with
cases. The courts deal with only those cases in which the
criteria for the resolution of disputes through the ADR
mechanism cannot be achieved. ADR mechanism is used in
every led of UK and is an obligation under the CPR to resort
to it if the dispute can be resolved through ADR.
Mediation had several initiatives in the United Kingdom in the

1970s.[52] The rst eld where the mediation was used as a
mechanism to resolve dispute is the employment eld. There
were several acts which were passed over the year which
gave the provisions of conciliation, arbitration and mediation.
Contracts of Employment Act 1963, Redundancy Payments
Act 1965, Industrial Relations Act 1971 and Trade Union and
Labour Relations Act 1974 were some of these acts which
provided mediation for the rst time in UK[53]. 


Mediation became a part in family matters as to the report of

the Finer Committee which made the use of Conciliation
Service in the case of family matters as there was increase in
one parent families and divorce cases issues arising in UK. In
1981, few initiators came forward and form National Family
Conciliation Council which helped the families in such
disputes and later on in 1992 with increase in such services
and term mediation, the title was abbreviated to National
Family Mediation. Moreover, Solicitors Family Law
Association was formed in 1982 to help the people settle
matrimonial disputes by way of peaceful settlement. [54]
Another important place where mediation developed in UK

were schools, in the year 1981 Kingston Friend Workshop
Group started teaching children the methods of resolving the
con icts peacefully. It also led to the formation of European
Network for Con ict Resolution in Education in which
interested lawyers used to meet and the development of
con ict resolution and mediation skills in schools was their
primary aim. Apart from this the Bristol Association for the
Care and Resettlement of Offenders in 1972 consider

mediation as a tool between the victim and offender where


the offender can realise the consequences of their action.[55]
This way mediation started penetration different parts of the
society in UK and was being used as an effective tool to
resolve the con icts peacefully.
The lawyers in London heard about mediation being used in

the USA and wanted to use them in commercial mediation in
the UK. The Centre for Dispute Resolution was launched in
November 1990 with the help of Confederation of British
Industry (CBI) and several leading law rms.[56] This made
mediation enter into the commercial sector and the
companies started using mediation as a toll to resolve their
disputes. Moreover, NHS (National Health Services)
previously Family Health Service Authorities (abolished in
1996) make available conciliation services to both the parties
to a compliant[57].
Another project developed in 1991 was the Elder Mediation

Project (EMP), in which the need of elders was taken into
consideration. It is linked with community mediation and has
volunteers who wants to resolve the con icts of the people in 
their old age. Seeing the use of mediation in so many sectors


of the UK, the civil justice system went under a reform. The
reform was led by the Woolf Report on access to justice
which endorsed the use of ADR wherever possible. The Civil
Procedure Rules 1999 laid down the uniform procedure code
for the courts. However, ADR was not made compulsory but
the courts have an obligation to encourage the use of ADR.
[58] This is how to ADR came into existence in the legal
scenario of the UK. ADR has grown over a period of time and
is the being used in UK in every sector and eld wherever it is
possible.
LEGAL FRAMEWORKOF ADR
The CPR have laid down the strict regulations called the pre-
action protocols which emphasise that whenever the dispute
arises and it is being litigated then it must ensure that it was
the last resort for the resolution of the dispute. There are
currently ten protocols which guide the criteria for the
disputes. When there are no protocols then Pre –Action
conduct states the way by which the parties should resort to
resolve the dispute before the commencement of the 
proceedings. This Pre- Action conduct directs the parties to


follow a procedure before going in for litigation. [59]
The rst step requires the claimants to write to the defendant

the claims and send an ADR form in which the claimant
should mention the form of ADR suitable and ask the
defendant to agree to it. Then, the defendant should reply
whether he agrees to the proposal by the claimant or not and
if not then he must state the reason or an alternative method
of ADR. If the parties resort to litigation, then they have to
provide evidence to the court that they have considered
alternative means to resolve the dispute. If the refusal of
ADR is not with appropriate reasons then it may attract
criticism from the court.[60]
In UK the parties should consider ADR mechanism from the

rst step to resolve the dispute. The claimant should mention
speci cally the form of ADR to resolve the dispute. ADR is
considered to be the best way to resolve the dispute so the
courts and legal framework encourage it to the most but
does not make it binding to the parties. Hence, the
encouragement has led to resolution of many disputes 
through the alternative means rather than litigation. The CPR


has an overriding objective which the court need to follow as
a way to encourage the ADR mechanism.[61]
The Overriding objective is one of the innovations of the CPR.

These are the procedural code which enable the court to deal
with the cases justly, as to ensure the parties are on equal
footing, saving the expense; dealing with the case according
to the nature of money involved, importance of the case,
complexity of the issue and nancial position of each party.
The case to be dealt fairly and expeditiously, allotting
appropriate resources of the court. The active management
of cases is to be done by the courts so as to encourage the
people to resort to an alternative means to resolve their
dispute. Solicitors and Barristers are also under the same
duty to encourage ADR mechanism to resolve the dispute.
[62]
Even after the litigation has started they are required to

complete and allocation questionnaire in which they parties
and legal representative have to personally con rm what
steps have been taken to resolve the dispute through an 
alternative means and the legal representatives have made


their client understood the need to settle through alternative
means, the options available and the possibility of cost
expenditure if the client refuses to settle through ADR. At this
stage of allocation, the parties may resort to ADR and if the
court deems can order a stay for a month. [63]
This is how the CPR encourages ADR mechanism to the

parties to the dispute so that they are given full chance to
understand the nature of dispute and the alternative means
to resort their dispute and if they do not resort to the
alternative means then the litigation costs and other factors
related to it are to be considered. In UK Solicitor’s
Professional Conduct has made it obligatory for the solicitors
to inform their clients about the alternative means of
resolving the dispute. They should inform their clients about
the different methods of ADR they can use to resolve their
dispute.
The Solicitors Code which came into force in 2007, in which

the Rule 2.02(1)(b) requires that the solicitor must give the

client a clear explanation of the issues involved and the


options available to the client.[64]
Part 1 – Rule 1 of the CPR states about the overriding

objective of the court. Part 26 – Rule 26.4 states that the
party may during questionnaire may resort to ADR by asking
for stay of proceedings. Part 44 – Rule 44.3 states about the
court’s discretion as to award of costs in regards to the
extent to which the parties followed pre-action protocols.
Family Procedure Rules 2010 has similar provision for the use
of ADR mechanism in case of con ict. Rule 3.1 states about
the encouragement to use ADR, Rule 3.2 states that court at
every stage must consider about the use of ADR and Rule 3.3
states that court can adjourn the proceedings and can advice
that ADR should take place. [65]
LEGAL FRAMEWORK OF ODR
The use of information and communication technology (ICT)

in resolving disputes online has played an important role over

the last decade. The ICT has much to offer in resolution of


disputes online which are of not much value. Now the times
have changed now people use email instead of letter, use of
laptop for buying the needful items in daily use to luxurious
items is possible though ICT. ICT can be used as a helpful tool
to the existing ADR mechanism such as mediation. The
resolution of dispute online is referred to as Online Dispute
Resolution. Three factors have driven the development of
ODR. Firstly, the growing need for quick and cheap methods
of dispute resolution. Secondly, ODR is helpful in resolving
small scale disputes. In this the dispute between consumers
i.e. C2C can be resolved electronically and another dispute
between buyer and consumer i.e. B2C can also be resolved
online. Thirdly, it can be helpful in the case where the parties
are distance apart and cannot hold meetings in that scenario
ODR can prove really useful and the dispute can be resolved
online. [66]
The European Union has developed a common approach on

the disputes relating to goods purchased online. The E-
Commerce Directive was adopted in 2000 setting up a
framework for electronic commerce, EU Directive 2000/31/EC.
The services cover all the services being provided online. The 
main objective of the directive is that all the disputes


occurring online in the European Union should be resolved
without going to court. [67]
In the United Kingdom, the Mediation Room has the

technology to enable all forms to resolve a dispute online.
They provide licenses for the use of their software and other
necessary tools. They also provide training courses in ODR
and mediators from their panel. The ICT has developed many
usages in relation to ADR online. Likewise, the UK’s Bar
Council has published an article for helping those who want
to conduct meetings online. [68] The ODR system has been
launched of cially on the internet and is being used by the
people but it lacks the basic criteria i.e. readily available
software for the use and awareness among the people about
the ODR system.
CONCLUSION

The United Kingdom does not have any legal statute for ADR

mechanism but it has incorporated ADR in the Civil
Procedure Rules 1999. It has ADR in the legal regulatory
framework and encouragement of ADR at every stage of the
dispute is done by the courts. The pre action protocols and
the rst communication by the claimant to the defendant
involves the very basic and crucial step of resorting the
dispute through ADR. With the use of ADR at the basic level
the people may resort to an alternative means to resolve the
dispute and they will be well aware about what an ADR
mechanism is and it forms.
Moreover, the solicitors and the barristers are also under the
code of conduct i.e. they have to make sure that their client
has the knowledge about the alternative means and if the
client does notsettle’s the case through an alternative means
than litigation is the last resort but is costly. The legal
representatives of the client in the courts also have to give an
undertaking that they have informed their clients about the
alternative procedures to resolve the dispute. However, in
between the proceeding if the party deem t then it may
resort to ADR at any time. The court can also stay the
proceedings so that the parties resort to alternative means. 
The whole structure of legal framework in UK encourages


ADR to the fullest not as an obligation but as a means to
resolve the dispute.
CHAPTER 5
India and UK: What the comparison shows?
RESEARCH FINDINGS
In India the expose to the mechanism of ADR is limited.

Judges and lawyers are not much aware about the
mechanism and hindrance to knowledge regarding the ADR
mechanism is making the use limited. The courts are looking
for a legal framework with guidelines over mediation and
section 89of the C.P.C. may be incompatible with the 
guidelines provided in this section. India does not have


enough trained mediators. The main obstacles to ADR are
that there is lack of judicial impact assessment scheme, the
pay scale of lawyers opting in for mediation is critically low,
unawareness of the litigants about the ADR mechanism. The
lawyers see their short term interest in resolving disputes
through litigation and disengage in methods of ADR which
are reasonably cheap and are outside the court. The dilemma
arises to two levels i.e. use of ADR in case of special legal
disputes and the use of ADR as a nationwide process to
resolve con icts. [69]
In India the ADR mechanism lacks legal backing, it does not

have any legal statute related to ADR and moreover the
recognition of ADR under CPC lacks the support of the
judiciary and lawyers. The people are unaware about such a
mechanism. However, India has Lok Adalat system which is
like people’s court in which they can resolve their disputes by
way of communication, they need not hire lawyers and they
can go and resolve the con ict themselves. But, Lok Adalat is
for cases which a very minute in nature and concern lesser
amount of money or issues. Lok Adalat also lacks
infrastructure, and people are unaware about it. The laws in 
India though processed but are fragmented, they need to be


regularized in the manner so that they can be put into proper
use. However, in the case of ODR, India lacks the legal
framework to support ODR’s existence.
In the United Kingdom under the CPR 1999, the use of ADR
may not be mandatory but it is obligatory at the initial step.
The claimant when writing a letter to the defendant has to
mention the type of form of ADR suitable for resolving the
dispute and the defendant if agrees the dispute is resolved
through ADR and if not then he can suggest another mode of
ADR for resolving the dispute but if he say no then a reason
has to be given as to the refusal to ADR. Moreover, the
solicitors and the barristers are under the code of conduct to
make sure that they inform their client about ADR and they
have to con rm it in person in the court if the case goes for
litigation. Also, the court looks into the reason for non-
acceptance of ADR to resolve the dispute and if the reason is
not valid enough it might lead to criticism in the court of law.
However, even during the proceedings the party can resort to
ADR and the court will put a stay to the proceedings.


The system of ADR in UK is very popular and people resort to


ADR methods instead of going to courts. The ODR system is
well established online and is being used by the people for
resolving their disputes online. But, the system is not fully
developed to resolve each and every dispute that occurs. The
methods and facilities provided by the National Center for
Technology and Dispute Resolution is under the framework
of ADR regulations, the difference is what ADR provides on
paper ODR is trying to provide it through electronic and
communications technology. If the development of ODR
increases with the same pace, then many disputes of
different people sitting in different parts of the world can be
resolved online through this Online Dispute Resolution
mechanism.
RESEARCH ANALYSIS
In India with comparison with the UK it lacks the legal statute

and rules which are incorporated in the UK framework. The
encouragement by the UK judiciary and lawyers for the use
of ADR is much more obligatory then in India. India lacks the
proper mediation centers and legal knowledge of ADR 
amongst the lawyers. The ODR mechanism is not introduced


in India at all whereas in UK the ODR mechanism works
under the principles of ADR and resolves disputes online
through its various online mediation, negotiation and
conciliation facilities available to resolve the disputes online.
In India, there is a guide on mediation whereas in the UK the
ADR is incorporated in the legal framework and the
guidelines to the strict adherence are helpful in promoting
ADR to resolve the disputes. The legal education system in
UK is much more upgraded as it teaches in the school as to
how to mediate the con ict whereas in India the legal study
is about the Arbitration and conciliation Act 1996 which is
now outdated and needs to be amended and it does not
cover’s all the aspects of the ADR.
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
INTRODUCTION



ADR is a cheap mechanism and is not time consuming. It is

also free from technical dif culties of litigation. The parties
have a feeling that there is no actual winning or losing rather
their grievance is resolved and the relationship between the
disputed parties comes back to normal.
RECOMMENDATIONS
ADR provides us a mechanism to resolve disputes outside

the court. As in India ADR systems are not implemented on a
crucial basis, but if ADR mechanism is given a legal existence
in the legal statutes then the burden on the courts would be
reduced. Mediation can be part of the juvenile criminal
system and in family matters. It will help the juvenile to
rehabilitate and reorganize his life as being a good member
of the society. In family disputes the members of the family
are well aware about the problems that are prevailing and
that can be solved through mediating each other rather then
a judge splitting them into parts.[70] In civil cases also
mediation can be of great help as petty disputes that are 
raised in the society can be solved through negotiation and


conciliation where both the parties know their best interests
and decide over it.
The Judicial system and its of cers in India have realized that
lack of this mechanism in the legal scenario has inherited a
lot of pending cases in the courts of India and which are
rising daily. [71]So, the Judicial system and the of cers should
recommend the government to enact a law in regard with the
ADR mechanism and the Judicial Of cers should adopt
different methods of resolving disputes and promote them.
They should also make sure that when resorting to such
methods or resolving disputes the parties should be given a
fair judgement, none of the party to the dispute should feel
that the judgement is been forced upon them. In India people
always have a habit of avoiding the courts, instead people
used unethical means to resolve their disputes which are not
acceptable in the society. Justice is not only a human right to
fair trial but in some countries right to fair trial within limited
time is a part of human rights legislation.[72]This can be
initiated by the judiciary by unless and until a infrastructure
and an institutional framework is created, the people
wouldnot be aware of such a mechanism. 


In UK there is a system whenever a new bill is to be passed a

judicial impact assessment is carried out which provides with
the expenditure which is to be incurred when a new bill or an
existing statue is to be amended. On 15th June 2008, Justice
M. Jagannadha Rao submitted its report on ‘Judicial Impact
Assessment’[73] to the then law minister of Government of
India. This system will be helpful in successful
implementation of ADR mechanism and other statues which
would be enacted or amended in future. The legislature
amended the Civil Procedure Code by bringing in section 89
there is lack of trained mediators. The expenses to be
incurred on the training of mediators, space to be provided
for mediating as in India courts don’t have enough space for
their existing work, in cases of family disputes where
mediation is practice or in case of Lok adalats, there is not
adequate or separate space, if JIA was implemented in India
before then all such things could be taken care of.
In the cases of Industrial Disputes Act where conciliation is

practiced, the conciliation takes place in the of ce of
conciliation of cers, or at the place of the management

where workers don’t get a fair chance to negotiate. There


should be separate place for ADR mechanism to take place
and under a fair environment. The High Courts of the states
should take into consideration this matter seriously and
implement this mechanism and follow the ADR and
Mediation Rules, 2003.The lawyers should be aware about it
and accept this mechanism. There should be a separate
training for mediators so that they can be given full
knowledge about how this legal mechanism is better and
how will it help the disputed parties and what is the legality
of ADR mechanism. By holding workshops, seminars
awareness can be spread as to this new system of dispute
resolving, so that people in India who avoid courts resort to
this mechanism of solving disputes rather using unethical
means. The disputants can be made aware about the
advantages of ADR and how is it different from the court
system.
The lawyer who want to practice as a mediator or conciliator

or a negotiator should be given a training and different legal
course should be introduced so that lawyer willing to practice
under ADR mechanism can have adequate knowledge and
learn they ways of ADR mechanism. A different eld of such 
counsellors can also be introduced who are not well aware of


the legal knowledge but are experts in psychology, sociology
which will help in the cases of family disputes. The ICADR
situated in Hyderabad provides training to arbitrators and
mediators but till now only eleven training sessions have
been organized across India. The courts should implement
this system and the judicial of cers should also be trained so
that they can look into the cases and decide which cases are
suitable for mediation, negotiation or conciliation and ask the
disputants to resolve their dispute through ADR mechanism
being speedy and effective. According to Hon’ble Mr. Justice
S.B. Sinha, Former Judge, S.C. of India, also suggested all
these suggestions in the article ADR: Mechanism and
Effective Implementation.
The Law Commission had made a recommendation on

judicial settlement a type of ADR method, that the court
should require the attendance of any party to the suit or
proceedings to appear in person with view to arriving at an
amicable settlement of dispute between the parties.

It is only when the parties fail to get their dispute resolved


through any of the alternative dispute resolution methods
that the suit could proceed further in the court in which it
was led.[74]
CONCLUSION

The study reveals that ADR mechanism is not of great

success. The other ADR methods like Lok Adalats and
mediation are gaining importance but mediation lacks legal
backing. As discussed above there have been many statutory
interventions for laying down the legal framework of ADR in
India but they have had not been successful. If ADR
mechanism is properly implemented in India it can help in
resolving disputes ranging from commercial to civil, family,
crimes by juvenile, to intellectual property disputes. The study
reveals that ADR mechanism is of great success as in the
UK, the ADR being practices has reduced the burden on the
courts. The other ADR methods like Lok Adalats and
mediation are gaining importance but mediation lacks legal
backing in India. As discussed above there have been many

statutory interventions for laying down the legal framework


of ADR in India but they have had not been successful.
If ADR mechanism is to be properly implemented in India it

can help in resolving disputes ranging from commercial to
civil, family, crimes by juvenile, to intellectual property
disputes. In India there is a need for a separate legal body
like the Bar Council of India which deals with the ADR system
and helps in the implementation of the ADR mechanism in
the whole country on the large scale. A separate body will
be helpful in implementing ADR mechanism in the country
like in UK a normal lawyer cannot practice as a mediator he
has to go through the courses available to become a
mediator.
So, in India a different regulatory body rather than the BCI(

Bar Council of India) should be made which looks after the
ADR system and registers lawyers for practicing as a
mediator. In this case, the lawyers have to study a different
course if they want to become mediators or negotiators or
conciliators. They will have to gain adequate knowledge
about ADR and they will have the code of conduct to 
encourage ADR to their clients, so that the people will get to


know about an alternative means of dispute resolution and
many people will want to resolve their con ict through ADR
mechanism rather than going for litigation. Moreover, ADR is
a cheap and speedy process as compared to litigation.
However, the best way to enhance the lawyers in India about

the ADR mechanism and to increase their knowledge and
skill is by change in the knowledge system. While studying
law the students should be taught about the ADR
mechanism as they are taught in UK, in school the students
of UK are taught about the con ict resolution mediation
programme. The students while studying can develop their
interest in the ADR mechanism and choose to become a
mediator, negotiation or conciliator. This mechanism will help
in spreading awareness about the system of ADR in India.
The lawyers recruited for the posts Judicial Magistrate First
Class are also not well versed with ADR mechanism, hence
they are not able to encourage ADR mechanism themselves.
The guidelines by the Supreme Court have been written
down for the practice of mediation.


But the lack of knowledge and awareness have caused the


hindrance to the use of ADR mechanism. Moreover, India
also lacks the legal framework as in UK. In UK the rst step to
resolve the dispute is through ADR, i.e. that the claimant will
send a letter to the defendant with a form of ADR the
claimant wants to resolve the dispute with, if the dispute is
not resolved through ADR then the court during the
questionnaire asks the reason for the rejection of the ADR
mechanism. This procedure is not followed in India which
leads the lawyers to choose litigation over ADR mechanism.
The future research should be in a direction that how an ADR

system be successfully implemented in India on a large scale.
Every district should have a mediation centre related to
disputes which can be resolved outside the court. In the
events of new cases being accepted by the judiciary the form
of ADR should be given as an option and the client should be
well informed about this mechanism, so that the client can
decide on the alternative means of resolution. Moreover, the
pending cases in India should be allowed in between the trial
to switch over to the ADR mechanism but for that enough
ADR mediation centres, enough mediators are should be
there so that the cases can be resolved through a speedy and 
fair process. In this way the burden on courts can start to


reduce but if ADR is not implemented on a large scale then
the problem of backlog of cases will continue and if there are
not enough mediators, negotiators or conciliators the there
will a burden of cases in the ADR system. To reduce the
burden on courts in India ADR is the best possible solution if
it creates an impact on the large scale and accepts the
guidelines as being followed in the UK.
Author :



BIBLIOGRAPHY
BOOKS
Barrett JT and Barrett JP, A History Of Alternative Dispute

Resolution The Story of a Political, Cultural, and Social
Movement (Jossey-Bass 2004)
Blake S, Browne J and Sime S, A Practical Approach to

Alternative Dispute Resolution (1st Edition Oxford
University Press 2011)
Boulle L and Nesic M, Mediation: Principles Process

Practice (Butterworths 2001)

Brown HJ and Marriott A, ADR Principles and Practice


(Sweet & Maxwell 2011)
Liebmann M, Mediation in Context (Jessica Kingsley

Publishers 2000)
MacFarlane J (ed), Rethinking Disputes: The Mediation

Alternative (Cavendish Publishing 1997)
Mackie KJ (ed), A Handbook of Dispute Resolution: ADR in

Action (Routledge and Sweet & Maxwell 1991)
Mof t ML and Bordone RC (eds), The Handbook of Dispute

Resolution (1st Edition Jossey Bass 2005)
Moss P and Oddy A, Alternative Dispute Resolution in

Practice (The Insurance Institute of London 2011)



Mullah DF and Desai SA, Mulla Hindu Law (21st Edition

Lexis Nexis)
Palkhivala NA, We the Nation (UBS Publishers 1987) 214
Rao PC and Shef eld W, Alternative Dispute Resolution:

What it is and How it Works (Reprint Edition 2009
Universal Law Publishing)
Roberts S and Palmer M, Dispute Processes: ADR and the

Primary Forms of Decision Making (First Published in 2005
Cambridge University Press)
Tripathi SC, The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 (5th

Edition Central Law Publication 2010


Wahab MSA, Katsh E and Rainley D (eds) (Eleven


International Publishing 2013)
JOURNAL ARTICLES
Fn’Pierre P and Work L, ‘On the Growth and Development

of Dispute Resolution’ (1992-1993) 81 Kentucky Law
Journal 959
Ide RW, ‘President’s Message’ (1993) 79 ABA Journal
Katsh Ethan, ‘Online Dispute Resolution: Some

Implications for the Emergence of Law in Cyberspace’,
(2007) 21.2 International Review of Law, Computers &
Technology 97


Katsh ME, ‘Dispute Resolution in Cyberspace’ (1996) 28


Connecticut Law Review 953
Pelliton LR, ‘Recent Developments in Alternative Dispute

Resolution’ (1987) 14 Pepperdine Law Review 929
Ramkrishnan K, ‘Scope of Alternative Dispute Resolution

in India’ (2005) 1 JV 1
Rudolf SE, ‘Blackstone’s Vision of Alternative Dispute

Resolution’ (1991-1992) 22 Memphis State University Law
Review 279
[1] Michael L Mof tt and Robert C Bordone, ‘Perspective on

Dispute Resolution: An Introduction’ in Michael L Mof tt and
Robert C Bordone, The Handbook of Dispute Resolution (1st
Edition Jossey Bass 2005)
[2] Jerome T. Barrett and Joseph P. Barrett, A History Of

Alternative Dispute Resolution The Story of a Political,
Cultural, and Social Movement (Jossey-Bass 2004) xxv

[3] ibid 1

[4] ibid
[5] ibid
[6] Laurence Boulle and Miryana Nesic, Mediation Principles

Process Practice (Butterworths 2001) 3
[7] Simon Roberts and Michael Palmer, Dispute process ADR

and the Primary Forms of Decision- Making ( rst published
2005, 2nd edn, CUP)
[8] M. Ethan Katsh, ‘Dispute Resolution in Cyberspace’ (1996)

28 Connecticut Law Review 953
[9] Ibid
[10] Ibid
[11] Ibid
[12] Ibid
[13]Katsh, Ethan, ‘Online Dispute Resolution: Some

Implications for the Emergence of Law in Cyberspace’, (2007)
21.2 International Review of Law, Computers & Technology
97 
[14] Blake S, Browne J and Sime S, A Practical Approach to


st
Alternative Dispute Resolution (1 Edition Oxford University
Press 2011)
[15] Aura Esther Vilalta, ‘ODR and E-Commerce’ in Mohamed

S Abdel Wahab, Ethan Katsh and Daniel Rainley (eds)
(Eleven International Publishing 2013) 125
[16] Ibid
[17] Pattrik Fn’Pierre and Linda Work, ‘On the Growth and
Development of Dispute Resolution’ (1992-1993) 81
Kentucky Law Journal 959
[18] Sarah E Rudolf, Blackstone’s Vision of Alternative

Dispute Resolution (1991-1992) 22 Memphis State University
Law Review 279
[19] Lee R Pelliton, ‘Recent Developments in Alternative

Dispute Resolution’ (1987) 14 Pepperdine Law Review 929
[20] Government of India Law Commission Report No. 222

(2009)

[21] Dinshaw Fardunji Mullah and Satyajeet A Desai, Mulla


st
Hindu Law (21 Edition Lexis Nexis)
[22] ‘Mediation Training Manual of India’, Supreme Court of

India
<http://supremecourto ndia.nic.in/MEDIATION%20TRAINING
%20MANUAL%20OF%20INDIA.pdf>
[23] Ibid
[24] PC Rao and William Shef eld, Alternative Dispute

Resolution: What it is and How it Works (Reprint Edition
2009 Universal Law Publishing)
[25] Government of India Law Commission Report No 76
[26] Rao and Shef eld (n 25)
[27] Ibid
[28] Ibid
[29] 210th Report of PAC (1975-76) (5th Lok Sabha), pp. 133-
139; 9th Report of PAC(1977-78) (6th Lok Sabha), pp.201-
202.


[30] Food Corporation of India v Joginderpal Mohinderpal,


AIR 1989 SC 1263
[31] K Ramkrishnan, ‘Scope of Alternative Dispute Resolution

in India’ (2005) 1 JV 1
[32] (n 23)
[33] CPC 1908
[34] Ibid
[35] SC Tripathi, The Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996

(5th Edition Central Law Publication 2010)
[36] Inserted by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment)

Act, 1999
[37] Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996
[38] ‘Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Services for National

and International Stakeholders Launched by TLCEDRI’
<http://odrindia.in>
[39] Malimath Committee Report 1990
[40]Surjeet Singh & Other v. Harbans Singh & Others, AIR

1996 SC 135: The Supreme Court expressed its anguish for 
long delay as the case was lying pending in Civil Court of


Patiala since 1948 with no sight of its nalization.
[41] N.A. Palkhivala, We the Nation (UBS Publishers 1987)

214
[42] John F. Kennedy Inaugural Address on January 20, 1961
[43] Rao and Shef eld (n25)
[44] R. William Ide, ‘President’s Message’ (1993) 79 ABA

Journal
[45] Rao and Shef eld (n25)
[46] Gross, S.R.,” The American Advantage: The Value of

Inef cient Litigation”
[47] Moore, Re ections, Law in a Cynical Society, 1985
[48]
http://supremecourto ndia.nic.in/MEDIATION%20TRAINING%
20MANUAL%20OF%20INDIA.pdf
[49] ibid
[50] http://timeso ndia.indiatimes.com/india/Government-

considers-legal-backing-for- 
mediation/articleshow/50859726.cms

[51] Moss P and Oddy A, Alternative Dispute Resolution in

[52] Liebmann M, Mediation in Context (Jessica Kingsley

Publishers 2000)
[53] ibid 21
[54] ibid
[55] ibid
[56] ibid
[57] ibid
[58] ibid
[59] Moss P and Oddy A, Alternative Dispute Resolution in

[60] ibid
[61] ibid

[62] ibid

[63] ibid
[64] ibid
[65] Brown HJ and Marriott A, ADR Principles and Practice

[66] Blake S, Browne J and Sime S, A Practical Approach to

Alternative Dispute Resolution (1st Edition Oxford University
Press 2011)
[67] ibid
[68] Brown HJ and Marriott A, ADR Principles and Practice

[69] http://mediationbhc.gov.in/PDF/ADR.pdf
[73]
http://doj.gov.in/sites/default/ les/judicialimpactassessmentre

portvol1%20%201_0.pdf

[74] Clause 7 of the CPC (Amendment) Bill, 1999.
SHARE
   
 Law and Morality
CNLU Patna National Seminar on “IPR: Emerging Issues

and Challenges” 
Related Posts
Problems in the Indian judicial system

 January 19, 2021

Stock Exchange and its Derivatives

 January 18, 2021
Emergency Provisions of US and India: A Comparison

 January 17, 2021








Contact us
+91 7903775870 (WhatsApp)
indianlegalsolution1@gmail.com
support@indianlegalsolution.com
Top Ranked Legal website of India.

4th Ranked legal website of India
All Rights Reserved © 2017- 2021.

Proudly powered by WordPress | Theme: Engage Mag by
Candid Themes.


Need For Adr India

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Need For Adr India

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2/14/2021 The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a comparative analysis with The United Kingdom.

e United Kingdom. - Indian Legal Solution

Indian Legal Solution

You are Here Home  Legal Articles 

The need of ADR and ODR system in 

The need of ADR and ODR system in India with a

Author : Mr. Gautam Matani,

Legal Manager at MKU Ltd.

LLM from School of Law, University of Leeds, England.

Supervised by – Dr Iyiola Solanke

ADR is a mechanism which is used widely in UK to resolve

the use of ADR can reduce the burden on courts. In the UK

ADR- Alternative Dispute Resolution

Bengal Regulation 1772

Contracts of Employment Act 1963

Chapter 2 – Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Study in

Online Dispute Resolution……………………………………………………..14-

Need and Growth of ADR and

Chapter 3 – ADR and India

History of ADR in India…………………………………………………………21-

Law of ADR in India…………………………………………………………….25-30

Law of ODR in India…………………………………………………………….30-31

Pro’s and Con’s…………………………………………………………………33-35

Need for more centers and training for lawyers and

Chapter 4 – ADR and the United Kingdom

Legal Framework of ADR………………………………………………………39-

Legal Framework of ODR………………………………………………………42-

Chapter 5 – India and UK: What the comparison shows?

Chapter 6 – Conclusions and Recommendations

A dispute has been and will be a recurring part of socio-

dispute arises, which is dealt by different individuals in

Individuals disputes are time consuming, emotionally

ADR stands for Alternative Dispute Resolution, a system

The purpose of this dissertation is to understand the basic

The research is conceptual and comparative which includes

AIM OF THIS RESEARCH

The aim of this study is to analyze the effectiveness of the

1. How will ADR reduce the burden on the courts in India?

Alternative Dispute Resolution: A Study in General

The history of ADR can be traced back to 500BC, an ADR

The traces of present methods under ADR can be found in

The Bushmen of Kalahari

The Bushmen is a society of hunter- gatherers living in

These islanders belong to the Polynesian ancestry and solve

There are many places like The Kpelle of Central Liberia

It is a decision making process, in which the parties are

establish communication, identify the needs and interests of

It is a method in which a third party is involved in resolving

their dispute and achieve whatever is desired. Moreover, this

ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

According to a computer scientist David Gelenter cyberspace

Cyberspace is a place of new ideas and innovations which

together in new fashioned way. This space will lead us to an

The disputes in cyberspace will continue to increase, as the

So the need of ODR came into being with following projects

1. The Virtual Magistrate Project

The University of Massachusetts Online Ombuds Of ce

In the year 1994, ecommerce was on the beginning phrase

But with the increase in the use of Internet or the W.W.W.,

The United Nations Commission on International Trade Law

The development of ODR has made available the following

Assisted Negotiation- In this the parties submit their blind

Online Mediation-In this the third person act as a mediator, in