Introduction

A democratic country has an inevitable requirement of continuously

advancing, making continuous variations in the policies and law and making
efforts to make it a more socially politically and economically developed state.
A major pillar of democracy is the judicial body which holds a powerful stand in
achieving the above. Traditional courts were made to solve disputes between
the people and safeguard the constitution. But with time and gradual increase
in population the disputes on civil and criminal matters also started burdening
the courts with abundant cases. With the recent introduction of information
technology, the burden has furthermore increased. The fact that a large
number of these cases which the traditional courts deal with are on very trivial
issues which are also not to be ignored because of these matters worth hearing
get piling up. The vast case log that is pending n the courts the government
and judicial committees recommended alternate methods of dispute
resolution (ADR) via Mediation and Negotiations.

In this modern era where courts all around the world are burdened with cases
and file loads, ADR is a widely accepted alternative to resolve disputes which
may be regarding divorce, tax or commercial disputes like merger and
acquisition or a dispute which involve a disagreement between parties and
many people are turning towards these dispute resolution methods to resolve
before acquisition disputes. The procedure taken to resolve disputes here is
affordable, less procedural, less time consuming, the promise of confidentiality
and gives more control to the individuals involved in the dispute and yields
more efficient results. Many Jurists have preferred and advocated for ADR as a
post- proceedings resolve settling mechanism. ADR is also being used more
frequently in commercial and company based disputes.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is a technique to resolve disputes and

disagreements between the parties by arriving at an amenable settlement
through negotiations and discussions. It is an attempt to establish an
alternative mechanism other than the traditional methods of dispute
resolutions. The ADR mechanism offers to facilitate the resolution of matters
of business issues and the others where it has not been possible to initiate any
process of negotiation or arrive at a mutually agreeable solution.
Meaning of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

The process by which disputes between the parties are settled or brought to an
amicable result without the intervention of Judicial Institution and without any
trail is known as Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR.

ADR offers to resolve all type of matters including civil, commercial, industrial
and family etc., where people are not being able to start any type of
negotiation and reach the settlement.

Generally, ADR uses neutral third party who helps the parties to communicate,
discuss the differences and resolve the dispute.

It is a method which enables individuals and group to maintain co-operation,

social order and provides opportunity to reduce hostility.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms

 ADR is a mechanism of dispute resolution that is non adversarial, i.e.

working together co-operatively to reach the best resolution for
everyone.

 ADR can be instrumental in reducing the burden of litigation on courts,

while delivering a well-rounded and satisfying experience for the parties
involved.

 It provides the opportunity to "expand the pie" through creative,

collaborative bargaining, and fulfill the interests driving their demands.

Types of ADR
Arbitration

 The dispute is submitted to an arbitral tribunal which makes a decision

(an "award") on the dispute that is mostly binding on the parties.

 It is less formal than a trial, and the rules of evidence are often relaxed.
  Generally, there is no right to appeal an arbitrator's decision.

 Except for some interim measures, there is very little scope for judicial
intervention in the arbitration process.

Conciliation

 A non-binding procedure in which an impartial third party, the

conciliator, assists the parties to a dispute in reaching a mutually
satisfactory agreed settlement of the dispute.

 Conciliation is a less formal form of arbitration.

 The parties are free to accept or reject the recommendations of the

conciliator.

 However, if both parties accept the settlement document drawn by the

conciliator, it shall be final and binding on both.

Mediation

 In mediation, an impartial person called a "Mediator" helps the parties

try to reach a mutually acceptable resolution of the dispute.

 The mediator does not decide the dispute but helps the parties
communicate so they can try to settle the dispute themselves.

 Mediation leaves control of the outcome with the parties.

Â

Negotiation

 A non-binding procedure in which discussions between the parties are

initiated without the intervention of any third party with the object of
arriving at a negotiated settlement to the dispute.

 It is the most common method of Alternative Dispute Resolution.

  Negotiation occurs in business, non-profit organizations, government
branches, legal proceedings, among nations and in personal situations
such as marriage, divorce, parenting, and everyday life.

Lok Adalat

 An interesting feature of the Indian legal system is the existence of

voluntary agencies called Lok Adalats (Peoples' Courts).

 The Legal Services Authorities Act was passed in 1987 to encourage out-
of-court settlements, and

 the new Arbitration and Conciliation Act was enacted in 1996.

 Lok Adalat or "People's Court" comprises an informal setting which

facilitates negotiations in the presence of a judicial officer wherein cases
are dispensed without undue emphasis on legal technicalities.

 The order of the Lok-Adalat is final and shall be deemed to be a decree

of a civil court and shall be binding on the parties to the dispute.

 The order of the Lok-Adalat is not appealable in a court of law

Objectives of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

* Affordable and speedy trials with less procedural work

* Aims to settle the disagreement peacefully by way of compromise,

negotiation or fair settlements.

• Uses a direct approach to settle the dispute- one to one conversations and
rigorous discussions to give a better understanding of each party's view.

• Explanatory in nature- gives in-depth information about the judicial policies

and rules without being binding on the party

• Works on the principle of diplomacy- win-win for both parties.

* Communication is the key- the more the parties at dispute communicate the
more it increases the chances of coming to a mutually agreeable point.

• Maintaining confidentiality- Keeping the information and dispute classified

and inside the organization

• Creating pre-dispute guidelines and rules to save from future issues and give
a systematic framework

• The most important aim- avoid judicial proceedings and trials.

The Supreme court of India has also in many instances emphasized the need of
ADR: In one case M/s Guru Nanak Foundation Vs M/s, Rattan Singh & Sons.

"Interminable, time consuming, complex and expensive Court procedures

impelled jurists to search for an alternative forum, less formal, more effective
and speedy for resolution of disputes avoiding procedural claptrap and this led
them to Arbitration Act, 1940 (Act for short). However, the way in which the
proceedings under the Act are conducted and without an exception challenged
in Courts has made lawyers laugh and legal philosophers weep. Experience
shows and law reports bear ample testimony that the proceeding under the
Act has become highly technical accompanied by unending prolixity, at every
stage providing a legal trap to the unwary. Informal forum chosen by the
parties for expeditious disposal of their disputes has by the decisions of the
Courts been clothed with 'legalese of unforeseeable complexity.

Legal History of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

in India

Alternate dispute resolution was acknowledged after the coming of British's,

after the formation of Bengal Regulations of 1772 and 1781 which recognized
non-traditional court dispute resolution committees and provided the
allowance of submission of disputes via arbitrator.

Then later Arbitration Act VIII, 1857 came into place which codified the
procedure followed by courts. In this Act, sections 312 to 325 dealt with suits
coming via arbitration which acknowledged the ADR committee without the
involvement of the civil courts. The Arbitration Act of 1889 which was a born of
the English Arbitration Act of 1889 was the first pillar law. Arbitration Act 1940
replaced the act of 1889 and had ADR regarding provisions in Section 104 of
the IInd Schedule of Code of Civil Procedure 1908

In India, Lok Adalats are also a [ubject of ADR. They were given statutory
authority In 1987 which came into 1995. The Arbitration Act was replaced by
the Arbitration Act, 1996.

Application of Section 89 and Order X Rules 1A, 1B and 1C by way of the 1999
amendment to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a revolutionary step
forward taken by the Indian Parliament in implementing the 'Court Referred
Alternative Dispute Resolution' method. Section 8 of the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 is of a peremptory sort. It is mandatory for the court to
refer the case for alternative dispute settlement in India if all the proof is
proved and there is an arbitration arrangement and the parties have, however,
submitted an application before the first declaration on the nature of the
dispute is made It is solely the court's discretion whether to refer the case In
India for arbitration or for other alternative dispute resolution or electronic
dispute resolution.

In India, ADR is established on the basis of Article 14 (Equality before law) and
Article 21 (Right to life and personal liberty) under the Constitution of India.
The Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) of Equal justice and free legal aid
as engraved in Article 39-A of the Indian Constitution can also be achieved by
the ADR.
Aspirants can check out the following links for further details

Right to Life (Article 21 of the Indian Constitution)

Directive Principle of State Policy (DPSP)

Preamble Decoded – Liberty, Equality, Fraternity & Justice

Importance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in
India

Addressing Judicial Backlog

The pendency of cases in Indian courts has reached alarming levels. According
to the National Judicial Data Grid, millions of cases are pending across various
courts, with some lasting decades. ADR plays a vital role in easing this burden
by resolving disputes faster and outside the formal court system.

Cost-Effective Justice

Litigation often involves hefty expenses, including court fees, lawyer charges,
and procedural costs. ADR significantly reduces these expenses by offering
simpler and less formal procedures. This makes justice accessible to individuals
and organisations with limited resources.

Timely Resolution

Court cases in India often span years, or even decades, due to procedural
delays and overcrowded dockets. ADR methods, such as arbitration and
mediation, offer timely resolutions, often within months. This not only saves
time but also reduces the mental and emotional toll on parties.

Preserving Relationships

Traditional litigation tends to be adversarial, often damaging relationships

between parties. ADR, by contrast, emphasises collaboration and mutual
understanding. Methods like mediation and conciliation help maintain
personal, professional, or business relationships.

Flexibility in Approach

Unlike court procedures bound by rigid rules, ADR allows parties to choose the
method that best suits their needs. For example:

 Arbitration can follow specific industry norms.

  Mediation allows parties to negotiate terms informally.

Confidentiality

Court proceedings are public, but ADR ensures confidentiality. This is

particularly valuable in sensitive disputes, such as family matters or high-profile
business conflicts, where privacy is crucial.

Promoting Access to Justice

ADR supports the constitutional principles of equality and justice under Articles
14 and Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. It also aligns with Article 39-A,
which mandates free legal aid and equal justice. By reducing procedural
hurdles and costs, ADR ensures that justice is not denied due to financial or
logistical constraints.

International Trade and Commerce

In global business transactions, ADR is often preferred over litigation due to its
speed, neutrality, and enforceability. Arbitration, in particular, is a key method
for resolving cross-border commercial disputes.

Laws Supporting ADR in India

India has developed a comprehensive legal framework to promote and

institutionalise Alternative Dispute Resolution. These laws ensure that ADR
mechanisms operate effectively and align with global standards.

Section 89, Civil Procedure Code, 1908

This provision empowers courts to refer cases to ADR when elements of

settlement outside litigation are identified. The section includes arbitration,
conciliation, mediation, and Lok Adalats as recognised methods, facilitating
faster and more amicable dispute resolution.

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act governs arbitration and conciliation

proceedings in India. It adopts international best practices under the UNCITRAL
Model Law, ensuring consistency and credibility in arbitration processes. The
Act also establishes the framework for resolving disputes through private
arbitral tribunals.

Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987

This act formalised Lok Adalats as a vital ADR mechanism. Lok Adalats offer
free and expeditious dispute resolution at both pre-litigation and court-
referred stages. Awards granted by Lok Adalats are binding, promoting
efficient justice delivery.

Mediation Bill, 2023

The Mediation Bill aims to institutionalise mediation as a primary ADR

mechanism. It provides a legal framework for mediation, ensuring
enforceability of agreements reached through the process. By emphasising
confidentiality and voluntary participation, the Bill strengthens mediation’s
credibility as a dispute resolution tool.
The Advantages and Limitation of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR)
Advantages of ADR

 Less Time-Consuming: ADR resolves disputes significantly faster than

courts, reducing the wait for justice.

 Cost-Effective: By avoiding the formalities of litigation, parties save on

legal fees, travel costs, and procedural expenses.

 Informal and Flexible: The absence of stringent rules and technicalities

allows parties to communicate freely and negotiate creative solutions.

 Confidentiality: Discussions and settlements remain private, protecting

sensitive information and reputations.

 Improves Party Control: ADR enables parties to play a direct role in the
resolution process, unlike courts where decisions are imposed.

 Reduces Court Burden: By diverting cases to alternative forums, ADR

helps decongest the judiciary, allowing courts to focus on critical
matters.

Challenges in Implementing ADR

While ADR offers numerous benefits, it faces certain challenges in India:

1. Lack of Awareness: Many individuals, particularly in rural areas, are

unaware of ADR processes and their advantages.

2. Resistance to Change: Traditional mindsets often prefer litigation,

viewing ADR as less authoritative.

3. Insufficient Infrastructure: There is a lack of adequate ADR centres,

trained professionals, and technological resources.

4. Enforcement Issues: Ensuring compliance with ADR outcomes, especially

in mediation and conciliation, can be challenging.
5. Limited Statutory Backing for Negotiation: Unlike arbitration and
mediation, negotiation lacks statutory recognition in India.