Topic - Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Theme- ADR and Access to Justice

Paper Topic-
BRIDGING ACCESS TO JUSTICE THROUGH
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

Authors Details:

Co- Author:1 Name – TAPAS KUMAR SETHI,

LLM (Business Law) Student of Final Year

Institution – PG Department of Law, Utkal University

Email - [email protected]

Contact No. - 8114609422.

Co- Author:2 Name – SUMAN JENA

LLM (Corporate and Commercial Law)

Email – [email protected]

Contact No. - 7008570230.

INTRODUCTION

“Justice denied anywhere, diminishes justice everywhere.” – Martin Luther King (Jr.)

Warren E. Burger, the former Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court,
expressed it very nicely “...the system is too costly, too painful, too destructive, too inefficient
for a truly civilized world.” (Kanti Karmakar, 2023).

There have been wars and battles since humanity first arrived on Earth. An essential
component of society has been the resolution of these disputes. Evaluating how well a
society's conflict resolution process works constitutes an approach to compute its progress
and successful operation. The majority of conflicts in the early era of history were settled
using basic and unofficial means. Over time, these unofficial systems evolved into structured
and formal ones. It is believed that reaching the goals of justice depends critically on the
conflicts being resolved effectively. Roscoe Pound who is the passionate philosopher of the
Sociological school of Jurisprudence believed that the balancing competing interests in
society is the purpose of the law and the existing legal system for resolving disputes.
(Jaiswal, n.d.-a). Every community has developed its own conflict resolution system, and
each one has special characteristics of its own.

Everyone is guaranteed justice under the Indian Constitution. Along with numerous other
essential rights, every Indian citizen is entitled to the same amount of life and personal
freedom. Other legal rights are granted by numerous social welfare laws, including the Equal
Remuneration Act of 1976, the Minimum Wages Act of 1948, and the Contract Labour
(Regulation and Abolition) Act of 1970. However, these rights are useless if a person lacks
the resources to have them upheld. All men are equal before the law, according to the rule of
law. Although everyone has the same rights, they are sadly not all able to exercise them
equally. The courts must be used to enforce the rights, but the lengthy, expensive, and
complicated legal process keeps the poor at a remove.
(GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION

Having access to justice entails having access to a court of law. Poverty, illiteracy, ignorance,
and political and socioeconomic backwardness restrict individuals from accessing the legal
system. People have no means to hire a lawyer. They are unable to take advantage of the
court justice system. The court cases that are now underway date back several years. For the
reasons mentioned above, ADR is being examined. The government of India was compelled
to look for other forms of justice outside of the judicial system in order to comfort the
impoverished and illiterate who lacked access to justice. The Parliament introduced Section
89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, which meant that conflicts would be resolved outside of
court, in addition to revolutionary revisions that made the party more dynamic. It allowed the
court the authority to submit such cases to arbitration, conciliation, mediation, or judicial
resolution through Lok Adalat, as was intended under section 89(2) CPC, in addition to
providing information about the court's satisfaction with regard to settlement chances.
(Rajinder Pal Goyal, 2023)
. Instead, native non-judicial procedures have long been used by
cultures all over the world to resolve conflicts. The majority of modern countries use
alternative dispute resolution techniques in addition to the conventional court model.

In this age of progress and upheaval, it is vital to realize that ADR is highly beneficial and
justified. There are several ways to see its relevance; it might be for the massive commercial
agreements and multimillion-dollar transactions, or it might aim to provide the average man
the right he has but is unable to obtain due to the system's overall inefficiency. “Law is a
regulator of human conduct. No law works smoothly unless the interaction between the two
is voluntary.”
(GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA Need for Justice-Dispensation

OBJECTIVE

- To delve into how ADR helps marginalized communities have better access to justice.
- To determine the obstacles to the adoption of ADR.
- To examine if alternative dispute resolution (ADR) yields more equitable and efficient
results than litigation.
- To investigate the effects of binding and non-binding ADR rulings on satisfaction and
acceptability.
- To evaluate how ADR efficiency and fairness are affected by the existence or lack
of legal experts.
RESEARCH PROBLEMS

1. How well can alternative dispute resolution (ADR) techniques address rural and
underprivileged people' access to justice?
2. Do ADR procedures guarantee result that are reasonable and equitable in addition to
being efficient?

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Using the doctrinal methodology, this study examines case studies, current literature, and
legislative frameworks pertaining to access to justice and alternative dispute resolution. The
effectiveness, fairness, and accessibility of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) systems are
compared to traditional litigation. The researcher has gathered and analysed data from a wide
variety of sources, such as reports, official websites, journals. In order to acquire and
substantiate knowledge that is pertinent to the research issue, the researcher has extensively
referred to a variety of publications, including books, bare acts, law journals, articles both
online and offline, and other types of publications.

LITERATURE REVIEW

The article “Alternate Dispute Resolution in Rural India: A Brief study about Panchayat
system” by Hrishikesh Jaiswal on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in India
emphasizes the Panchayat system's historical relevance as a customary, morally and culturally
grounded method of settling conflicts at the local level. The interaction between conventional
methods and modern legal systems is sometimes overlooked in existing research, which
concentrates on the regulation of ADR procedures. Additionally, little research has been done
on the sociopolitical elements that have shaped the Panchayat system's demise and possible
comeback in post-colonial India. The disparity emphasizes the necessity of a thorough
examination of the ways in which formal legal frameworks and traditional conflict resolution
procedures might complement one another in the modern world.
“Alternate Dispute Resolution and its acceptability in India” (2021) authored by Aditya
Narayan Tripathi and Shailja Shukla talks on the importance of ADR in India and how it
might help the overburdened Indian judiciary with its backlog of cases. It highlights how
ADR techniques, such arbitration and conciliation, provide effective and affordable
substitutes for conventional court processes, which is advantageous for both people and
companies. According to the authors, adopting ADR can result in speedier settlements of
numerous disagreements, increasing overall satisfaction for all parties involved, especially as
India strives to become a $5 trillion economy. In order to improve access to justice, the article
concludes by arguing for a wider public knowledge and acceptance of ADR.

Language hurdles, cultural inclinations toward conventional conflict resolution techniques,

and IT literacy are only a few of the obstacles to the adoption of Online conflict Resolution
(ODR) in rural India that are thoroughly examined in “The village says ‘no’: why online
ADR is not (YET) working in Rural India” (2021) by Clammer and Byrne. It ignores,
nonetheless, how local governance frameworks, like the Panchayat system, may either help
or hinder the adoption of ODR. One important study need is how these local organizations
could help the incorporation of ODR into current conflict resolution frameworks.
Additionally, the authors don't examine how socioeconomic differences in the village may
affect people's propensity to use ODR and their access to technology, which might have an
impact on ODR's overall sustainability in rural settings.

In spite of major obstacles such socioeconomic inequality and remote location, the paper
“Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Mechanisms in Rural
Areas"(2023) by Adv. Gauri Suresh, Adv. Mahesh Dashrath Sugdhare, Dr. Murlidhar
Namdeowani, Vrushali Ramesh Desai and Patil Sachin Dattatrey explores the efficacy of
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) processes in rural regions, emphasizing their potential
to improve access to justice. ADR is viewed as more beneficial by people with firsthand
experience, and although knowledge of the practice is reasonably widespread, actual usage is
limited, according to a research with 190 respondents. Inadequate formal support systems,
power disparities, and a lack of understanding are major obstacles to wider adoption. In order
to encourage the integration of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) with conventional
conflict resolution techniques and enhance rural residents' access to justice, the study
suggests specific interventions, such as awareness campaigns and capacity-
building programs.
The viability of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as a method for settling conflicts in
Bangladesh's rural areas is examined legally in “A Legal Analysis of the Suitability of
Alternative Dispute Resolution as a Rural Dispute Mechanism in Bangladesh” (2023) by
Kanak Kanti Karmakar. The author points out the ADR system's present flaws, such as the
absence of penalties for parties who choose to negotiate, and makes recommendations for
fixes, such as appropriate oversight and the creation of a review board. The historical
relevance of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) and its incorporation into the legal system
to improve access to justice and decrease case backlogs are highlighted in the article.

In its 222nd Report named “Need for Justice-dispensation through ADR etc.” (2009), the
Law Commission of India highlights the pressing need for Alternative Dispute Resolution
(ADR) procedures to resolve the court system's intricacies and delays. All people, especially
those who are economically and socially disadvantaged, should have equal access to justice,
the study emphasizes. It emphasizes that the poor and uneducated masses are
disproportionately impacted by the present legal processes, which are frequently unavailable
owing to their high prices and complexity. In order to advance a more fair and effective legal
system, the Commission urges a review of current legal frameworks.

Because of the massive backlog in traditional courts and the obstacles marginalized people
experience in obtaining justice, the literature on “Alternative Dispute Resolution as a mode
for Settlement of Disputes in India: A Critical Study” (2023) by Rajinder Pal Goyal
highlights the importance of this process. It emphasizes many ADR techniques, such as
mediation, arbitration, and Lok Adalat, as workable substitutes to lessen the strain on the
legal system. The absence of empirical studies analyzing the long-term efficacy and user
satisfaction of these ADR mechanisms across various socioeconomic groups, notably in rural
vs urban situations, represents a substantial research gap.

The development of indigenous customs, especially the function of panchayats in conflict

mediation, is highlighted in the research on "Dispute settlement in Rural India" (2013) by
Dr. Laju P. Thomas. Although the historical importance of dharma and regional traditions in
forming these practices is widely known, little is known about the modern ramifications of
these conventional structures in light of contemporary legal frameworks and how well they
work to address contemporary socio-legal issues in rural communities. Furthermore, little is
known about how globalization and shifting social dynamics affect conventional conflict
resolution procedures.
In a book review of “Dr. Davis Pradhan's book ‘Village Disputes and Their Resolutions
in India’” (2020) by Somabha Bandopadhay provides a thorough examination of the
customary dispute resolution procedures used in Indian villages, emphasizing both their
historical development and current applicability. It does a good job of contrasting these native
methods with official legal procedures, especially when viewed via the Gram Nyayalaya Act
of 2008. The author does not, however, explore the socioeconomic elements that affect these
conventional techniques' accessibility and efficacy, which may offer a more thorough
comprehension of their function in modern conflict resolution.

The literature on "General Overview as to the Distinction between Litigation and

Alternative Dispute Resolution Methods" (2020) authored by Partner Atty. Nilgün
Serdar Şimşek and Atty. Kerim Bölten emphasizes the benefits and drawbacks of each
strategy, drawing a clear contrast between litigation and alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
techniques. ADR is flexible, confidential, and economical, whereas litigation is defined by its
formal processes and dependence on court authority. The author does not, however, discuss
the changing role of technology in dispute resolution procedures, specifically how digital
platforms may either help or hurt the efficacy of litigation and alternative dispute resolution
techniques.

DISCUSSION / ANALYSIS

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

When examining India's dispute settlement tradition, three distinct periods can be
distinguished: a) the ancient phase; b) the colonial period; and c) the post-independence age.
Periodically, both the colonial powers and rulers made modifications to the Indian legal
system. The fundamental features of the Indian social structure were reflected in the country's
indigenous legal system, which lacked uniformity. Yogendra Singh asserts that the polity, the
stratification system, and cultural norms—the three fundamental pillars of India's social
structure—were all largely independent. Despite being at the top of this hierarchy were the
king and his administrative system, which forbade the king from getting involved in many
conflicts involving local customs, norms, and practices of castes, subcastes, or tribes. Instead,
these groups had their own dispute resolution procedures, which included panchayats, elder
leadership in the community, or the intervention of the chief of the dominant caste in the area.
(Dr. Laju P. Thomas, n.d.). The primary characteristics of this legal system and its "judicial
processes" were increased participation, paternalism, adaptability and creativity, and a focus
on hierarchy and compromise. In rural areas, "adjustment" rather than "judgement" was used
to administer justice. This was a low-cost, informal process. This was consistent with moral
principles and the community's cultural character. Numerous academics have conducted a
variety of studies on the native Indian legal system. (Baxi, 1976)

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Methods

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 addresses arbitration as one of the various
dispute resolution procedures that the disputing parties may choose to use. The parties, the
High Court, or the Supreme Court appoint a third, impartial party to decide the dispute
between the parties quickly and affordably. In many cases, the parties selected their own
arbitrators, or if they couldn't agree, they may have one appointed by the Supreme Court
or the High Court. People in the business sector or corporate houses benefit from it since they
don't want their lawsuits to go on for years in traditional civil courts since a protracted case
disrupts the peace and gets in the way of people's daily lives.

 Ad hoc arbitration

Without consulting an arbitral institution, the parties to this dispute determined how to
conduct the arbitration procedures. In accordance with section 11 of the Act, the Chief Justice
of the relevant High Court or his designee must appoint the arbitrator in domestic arbitration;
in international arbitration, the CJI or ACI must do so.

 Institutional Arbitration

The parties are free to choose their arbitrator from the arbitral institution if they have fixed in
their agreement to do so. International ADR centres and the Indian Council of Arbitration
both have established arbitration rules based on their extensive experience.
  Mediation

The mediator does not force his judgment on the parties during mediation. He provides the
parties with a solution. Although the disputing parties control the proceedings and the
mediator assists them in reaching a resolution, the agreements are often non-binding in
nature. A settlement reached by the parties and signed by the mediator takes the form of an
award that can be carried out like a civil court order.

 Negotiation

Another method of resolving disputes is negotiation. During negotiations, the parties

collaborated with their lawyers to develop a solution that would satisfy both of them. It does
not have statutory status in the nation.

 Conciliation

The conciliator helps the parties communicate to one other and occasionally engages in
conversation in order to help them come to a mutually acceptable agreement. The Arbitration
and Conciliation Act of 1996 governs it..

 Lok Adalat

Social justice was taken into consideration when introducing the idea of Lok Adalat. Lok
Adalats now have legal legitimacy thanks to the State Legal Services Authority Act of 1987.
The LSA's Sections 19 through 22 addresses how Lok Adalats are organized. Regardless of
color, caste, creed, or status, the act seeks to provide justice to everyone.
(Rajinder Pal Goyal, 2023)

In Abdul Hassan and National Legal Services Authority Vs. Delhi Vidyut Board and
others (1999), the establishment of Permanent Lok Adalats was mandated by the Hon’ble
Delhi Court. The rulings of the Lok Adalat shall be regarded as civil court orders.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) in Rural Areas

Every community and civilization have its own unique approach to settling conflicts among
its members; it is also noted that a society with a long and wealthy history tends to have a
more diversified and sophisticated dispute resolution procedure. India, a country with
numerous cultures, has a rich history despite certain colonial wounds. As a result, several
conflict resolution procedures have developed and been tailored throughout time. Indian
communities viewed the law as a moral code, or Dharma, rather than a collection of
regulations. Maintaining the status quo in society is the obvious objective, and giving
everyone in the community the chance to achieve their life's purpose is the ultimate goal.
Since ancient times, local disagreements have been settled informally all throughout the
nation, but the approaches taken to do so have not been consistent. (Jaiswal, n.d.-b)

The process by which the State or Sovereign government settles disputes outside of court,
known as alternative dispute resolution, or ADR, is an alternative to the formal legal
approach or the convention court system. ADR is a general phrase that encompasses all
legally allowed conflict resolution procedures outside of litigation. This word refers to all of
the strategies that the parties have employed to settle disputes outside of the nation's official
judicial system. What's new is the widespread adoption of ADR models, the expansion of
court-connected ADR, and the growing use of ADR as a vehicle to achieve objectives beyond
the resolution of particular disputes. The idea has been widely accepted in India for ages.
Legal history shows that throughout history, people have experimented with procedures to
make obtaining justice simple, affordable, reliable, and convenient.
(Centre for Democracy and Governance, 1998)

India is a country with disputed borders to this day. It can be separated into several "legal
realities" in addition to states, languages, and ethnic groupings. Indians in rural areas who
still live outside of major cities might not be as inclined to appear in court as members of the
middle class. Many people believe that the expansion of India's legal system, which includes
ODR i.e., Online Dispute Resolution, has the ability to empower the country's rural populace
and help it achieve its "demographic dividend" by boosting its economy and getting the rural
populace up to speed with IT dispute resolution. Nearly 70% of Indians reside in rural
regions, and they have put a considerably unfair reliance upon the conventional legal system
to resolve the disputes. (Clammer & Byrne, 2021)

India's communities offered several explanations for why ADR adoption was unsuccessful. In
addition to poor public perception, a lack of legal education, inadequate training programs,
and lawyer interests, this also includes the ineptitude of ADR practitioners, failed precedent, a
traditional attitude, and a lack of authority. ((Ansari, 2017). India with significant regional
variations in social structures, religious mix, natural circumstances (and thus local
economics), and other aspects. The likelihood that a particular hamlet will have access to any
kind of ODR mechanisms is obviously much influenced by these and other circumstances,
such as electrical availability, transportation connections, and the settlement's proximity
to a bigger town. While urban communities have far greater opportunities for this—given the
availability of broadband Internet access, relatively reliable electricity supply, higher
likelihood of knowledge of computer usage, and more diverse and fluid social structures
(and, of course, proximity to formal legal institutions)—rural communities, which still
constitute a large proportion of India’s population, are likely to be both relatively
disadvantaged technologically and to have other, more traditional, means of dispute
resolution. (Clammer & Byrne, 2021)

Regarding civil disputes, there is a dearth of information regarding the extent to which
marginalized people are using alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services. This information
could provide some insight into how rural and regional communities perceive their access
to ADR services. (Administration of Justice Offences: Final Report, 2004) . It goes without
saying that participation in dispute resolution is contingent upon the availability of such
services. As Sourdin noted, "the conversation about ADR procedures should continue to
center on accessibility issues." (Gibson & Rochford, 2011)

Informal behaviors have been less visible and less important in recent years. Without a doubt,
the village elders' dispute resolution processes are expedited. There are several benefits to
using mediation to settle disputes at the level of the individual. For the impoverished, this is a
shortcut to resolving their conflicts because they don't have the time or finances to use the
court system. Conciliation and mediation are therefore used to resolve conflicts in rural India.
Ancient India's panchayat system demonstrates this legacy. As an expansion of local level
mediation nationwide, we currently use court-annexed ADR procedures like Lok Adalat
and Family Court. (Dr. Laju P. Thomas, n.d.)

Efficiency of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Article 39A was introduced to the Directive Principles of State Policy (DPSP) by the Central
Government through the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, in recognition
of the need for legal help for the poor and needy. Known by its required language, Article
39A requires free legal assistance for the most vulnerable members of society. It is evident
from this that the State has been mandated to ensure a system that upholds the principles of
civil rights and promotes justice. It is stressed that in order to ensure that no resident is denied
the opportunity to get equity due to financial or other limitations, the system should be
prepared to provide free legal aid and swiftly administer justice based on those civil rights.
Individuals who lack resources and are impoverished require access to equity. They are not
helped by the mere acknowledgment of their rights if the infrastructure required to obtain
justice when it is required is not provided. (University, 2021)

The growth of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) in various nations, particularly

developing nations, is a step toward the equitable application of civil justice for all. It has
effectively opened the door to justice for both the rich and the poor, something that the
traditional legal system has not been able to accomplish. In contrast to the win-lose result of
the formalistic and legalistic method of litigation, alternative dispute resolution (ADR) allows
the parties to arrive to a mutually agreeable resolution. (Bhatt, (2002)). The win-lose scenario
typically turns into a severe barrier to the parties' future connection. Because it results in a
win-win scenario that not only resolves the conflict but also fosters reconciliation and
harmony that protects the parties' future relationship. It adheres to the procedure that the
parties and their designated mediator believe would best resolve their dispute, avoiding any
technical legal principles and legal procedural complications. In alternative dispute resolution
(ADR), the parties choose and manage the procedure to ensure a seamless, accurate, efficient,
and effective remedy. They also have the freedom to designate any expert in the
dispute's subject matter. (Islam, 2011). It is feasible to settle many lawsuits in a single session
using alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which not only preserves the plaintiffs' time and
effort but also significantly lowers costs. It can assist the parties socially and psychologically
in addition to guaranteeing these advantages. As a result, ADR is used to settle a huge number
of conflicts, which significantly lessens the strain on the ongoing lawsuits in regular courts.
One significant benefit of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) is the complete protection of
privacy, which is a fundamental human right and a fair expectation of all people. Privacy is
also a fundamental value that supports human dignity. (Karim, 2006). The matter is
ultimately resolved after a mediation settlement is achieved and a decree is issued. There is
no chance that a disagreement resolved through mediation will be reopened, unlike in a trial.
(Islam, 2011)
.
ADR's main goal is to reach an out-of-court settlement without resorting to the drawn-out
court's legal proceedings. This will relieve the parties to the conflict of the burden of drawn-
out procedures and ensure that the dispute is settled quickly. The most crucial question that
arises when we consider the advantages of the ADR system is how effective these settlements
are and how much they are helping to fairly and rationally settle disputes in real-
world situations. ADR cases have skyrocketed throughout India, indicating that more people
are choosing to settle their conflicts through ADR. ADR's efficiency, rationality, and time-
bound dispute resolution when compared to traditional court procedures are demonstrated by
the growing number of ADR cases.

However along with these benefits the ADR have certain drawbacks like its non-binding
nature and dependency upon the consent of parties etc. are concerns of the present day and
these bottlenecks needs to be addresses for the growth of ADR in future.

Advantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

 Speedy Disposal:

As the saying goes, "justice delayed, justice denied." The primary barrier to delivering justice
is delay. Our judicial system is now so slow that it is the primary cause of injustice and
human rights violations. The time required to resolve a lawsuit may increase from one or two
years to twelve, fifteen, or even more years. The need for the judgment may have ended in
many ways by the time it is delivered. (Islam, 2011). Mediation and other forms of Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) provide prompt resolutions, avoiding drawn-out judicial
proceedings and guaranteeing prompt justice.
 Prohibitive cost of litigation:
Ensuring fair justice for everyone is the main goal of the legal system. When justice is
granted to one and denied to another, it is impossible to imagine it being fair and equitable.
(Islam, 2011)
. Both the rich and the poor should receive the same treatment. Traditional court
procedures in India can be costly because of high legal fees, drawn-out litigation, and related
expenses including paperwork and numerous hearings, according to the NITI Aayog research
on ADR cost-effectiveness. However, compared to traditional litigation, Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) techniques like arbitration and mediation are substantially less expensive,
with costs lowering by as much as 50–70%. ADR is a cost-effective option for both
individuals and corporations since it reduces the strain on courts, minimizes business
disruptions, and expedites conflict resolution, all of which save indirect expenses.

 Procedural complexities:

The primary obstacles to delivering justice to the public are procedural difficulties. Judge
Krishna Iyer's thoughts on the Indian legal system One wonders why we are reluctant to
make changes when they observe the protracted intricacies of our forensic processes, the
pointless waste of judicial time and energy from trial courts to the supreme courts, and the
simple potential for time and money savings. (Islam, 2011). ADR guarantees that everyone
has access to justice, speeds up settlements, and lessens the load on the courts. It helps parties
to settle disputes amicably while maintaining relationships and lowering litigation costs. ADR
appears as a workable remedy for the structural hold-ups that impede justice in the
conventional court system in light of these benefits.

 Backlogging of cases:

A massive backlog of lawsuits or cases is clogging the court system. Delays in the judicial
procedure lead to backlogs, which in turn place a heavy burden on ongoing cases. The
backlog of cases also causes additional delays in the adjudicating process.

 Want of efficient, independent and dutiful judges and lawyers:

Judges and attorneys must be truthful, effective, independent, and obedient to their
obligations in order to properly preserve access to justice. For justice to be served fairly and
promptly, judges and attorneys must be effective, independent, and obedient. But access to
justice is frequently hampered by overworked courts and lengthy legal proceedings. ADR, or
alternative dispute resolution, is an essential tool to support the legal system by offering
quicker, more affordable, and unbiased resolutions. Disputes can be settled quickly while
maintaining justice and equity when ADR is facilitated by morally and professionally
qualified attorneys.

 Win-win situation:
In the context of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), a win-win scenario is one in which
neither party suffers a complete loss or victory but rather reaches a mutually advantageous
conclusion. ADR ensures fairness and maintains relationships by promoting peaceful
solutions through negotiation, mediation, or arbitration as opposed to a "Haar" (loss) or "Jeet"
(victory) scenario. An efficient substitute for drawn-out litigation, this strategy promotes
collaboration, saves money, and saves time.

Disadvantages of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) offers various benefits, but it also has notable
disadvantages:

 No Doctrine of Stare Decisis:

The principle of stare decisis, which states that decisions are not relied on prior case law, is
not followed by ADR procedures like arbitration and mediation. Because each case is decided
separately, without reference to other rulings, this may result in inconsistent conclusions. Due
to the absence of established legal precedents, parties may encounter
uncertainty in resolutions. (Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution in the Federal
Sector, n.d.-b)

 Limited Jurisdiction:

For criminal and constitutional issues, which call for official judicial action, alternative
dispute resolution (ADR) is typically inappropriate. ADR's applicability in these areas is
limited since these cases frequently entail legal concepts and public interest factors that
require court adjudication. (Agrawal, 2024)

 Not All ADR Methods Are Binding:

Generally speaking, non-binding procedures like mediation and conciliation allow the
mediator or conciliator to foster discussion without having the authority to enforce a ruling. If
the parties are unable to come to a peaceful arrangement, they might have to go to court,
which could take more time and money. (Agrawal, 2024)

 Suppression of the Weaker Party:

Power disparities in ADR can have a negative impact on results. Settlements that benefit the
stronger party may result from a party controlling the processes due to their larger financial or
political clout. The weaker party can suffer in the absence of a court's procedural safeguards.
(Fotohabadi & Fotohabadi, 2022)

 Inadequate Appeal Mechanism:

Strong appeal procedures are sometimes absent from ADR rulings, especially in arbitration.
Even if there are factual or legal errors, there are few avenues for appeal after an arbitrator's
ruling is made. If a party feels that the verdict is unfair, this finality may work against them.
(Fotohabadi & Fotohabadi, 2022)

 Lack of Awareness and Expertise:

The general public generally lacks knowledge and experience with ADR procedures. This
may result in the improper use or underutilization of ADR techniques. For example, despite
the advantages of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), practitioners' and participants' lack of
knowledge and training frequently limits its efficacy, according to a report by the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.

These drawbacks emphasize how crucial it is to carefully assess whether alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) is appropriate for a given issue and to make sure that parties are well-
informed and ready for ADR procedures. (Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution in
the Federal Sector, n.d.-b)

RECOMMENDATIONS

The study's policy recommendations to promote the spread of ADR (and consequently online
ADR) include culturally relevant awareness campaigns in Hindi and other local languages,
educational campaigns conducted by NGOs and schools, the use of local role models like
athletes and actors, and other strategies to "normalize" ODR as a sensible decision rather than
a curiosity. In the setting of the hamlet, mobile phone apps may be significantly more useful
than PCs. Furthermore, introducing new holo-conferencing trends too soon could cause too
much of a culture shock. There is little indication that the prevalence of online video games
and movie streaming, particularly among younger people (the majority of whom are also
highly accustomed to social media applications), has any bearing on the prospective usage of
ADR procedures. ADR seems to be fueled by technology. There is little indication that the
prevalence of online video games and movie streaming, particularly among younger people
(the majority of whom are also highly accustomed to social media applications), has any
bearing on the prospective usage of ADR procedures. ADR seems to be fueled by technology.
(Alexander, n.d.)

Since the villagers were not aware of the existence of online alternative dispute resolution
(ADR) mechanisms or the local government's efforts to promote them, they were also not
aware of the legal enforceability of successful online ADR mechanisms, the guarantee of
confidentiality, the benefits of online ADR over traditional methods, or the types of ADR
methods that were available to them, such as conciliation, arbitration, and mediation.

It may be beneficial to include online ADR into already-accepted village-level ADR forms,
like mobile Lok Adalats, if those sessions were held online or with cell phones. As a result,
Lok Adalats done through traditional methods further minimize current delays and are more
accessible to rural villages in a framework that is acceptable to their culture.

Other suggestions include enhancing ADR training, assuring arbitrator accountability,

decreasing delays, boosting ADR efficiency, altering stakeholders' perspectives, raising
awareness of ADR, and staging street plays in the local dialect. In fact, this has been carried
out in many rural parts of India to increase knowledge of hazards (like AIDS) as well as new
opportunities (such water collecting, agriculture, and local energy systems).

CONCLUSION

People and the court administrative system would undoubtedly benefit from the use of ADR
approaches. ADR methods must be used for a number of reasons, but it is important to ask
whether we really need an excuse to improve the efficiency and ease of our lives and the
administration of justice. J.K. Lieberman's observation that "litigation has become the
nation's secular religion" is entirely true, moreover, it is universal in character, and it
accurately depicts the situation in every nation on earth. (OpenLibrary.org, 1971)

The current ADR systems are insufficient to ensure that society receives fair justice,
particularly in rural areas. The current system presents numerous obstacles to effective
monitoring. Because of this, a codified legislation is necessary to support the benefits of
alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedures and lessen the excessive workload of cases
 in our legal system. The general public in rural areas typically wants simple, quick, and
affordable justice from the headmen or leaders of their local villages, or other individuals
who are typically involved in resolving disputes but lack legal expertise or concern.

As a result, the government must to be proactive by enacting appropriate legislation and

keeping an eye on this system to guarantee justice.

REFERENCES

Administration of justice offences : final report. (2004). Govt. Printer.

Alexander, N. (n.d.). Mobile mediation: How technology is driving the globalization of ADR.
http://hellsdireagent.blogsome.com/2006/02/02/an-asian-perspective-on-
Baxi, U. (1976). ACCESS, DEVELOPMENT AND DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: ACCESS
PROBLEMS OF TFF “RURAL” POPULATION. In JOURNAL OF THE INDIAN LAW
INSTITUTE (Vol. 18).
Centre for Democracy and Governance, W. (1998). Alternative Dispute Resolution Practitioners’
Guide.
Clammer, J., & Byrne, M. (2021). The Village Says “No”: Why Online ADR is Not (Yet) Working
in Rural India. Law, Technology and Humans, 3(1), 133–147.
https://doi.org/10.5204/lthj.1564
Dr. Laju P. Thomas. (n.d.). DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN RURAL INDIA: AN OVERVIEW.
JOURNAL OF LEGAL STUDIES AND RESEARCH, 2. www.jlsr.thelawbrigade.com
Gibson, F., & Rochford, F. (2011). Dispute Resolution in Rural and Regional Victoria. SSRN
Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1540580
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA Need for Justice-dispensation
through ADR etc. (2009a).
GOVERNMENT OF INDIA LAW COMMISSION OF INDIA Need for Justice-dispensation
through ADR etc. (2009b).
Islam, M. S. (2011). Efficiency and Effectiveness of Alternative Dispute Resolution Schemes
Towards the Promotion of Access to Justice in Bangladesh (Issue 8).
Jaiswal, -Hrishikesh. (n.d.-a). Alternate Dispute Resolution in Rural India: A Brief study about
Panchayat system. http://www.lawreform.ie
Jaiswal, -Hrishikesh. (n.d.-b). Alternate Dispute Resolution in Rural India: A Brief study about
Panchayat system. http://www.lawreform.ie
Kanti Karmakar, K. (2023). A Legal Analysis of the Suitability of Alternative Dispute Resolution
as a Rural Dispute Mechanism in Bangladesh.
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/alternative_dispute_resolution
Rajinder Pal Goyal. (2023). Alternative Dispute Resolution as a mode for Settlement of Disputes
in India: A Critical Study. FACULTY OF LAW, MAHARSHI DAYANAND UNIVERSITY,
ROHTAK.
University, A. (2021). RISE OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION STEPPING
TOWARDS EFFICIENT JUSTICE SYSTEM BY ALLIANCE CENTRE FOR
ALTERNATE DISPUTE RESOLUTION.
(Effectiveness of alternative dispute resolution in the federal sector. (n.d.). US EEOC.
https://www.eeoc.gov/federal-sector/reports/effectiveness-alternative-dispute-resolution-
federal-sector)

(Fotohabadi, M., & Fotohabadi, M. (2022, September 1). Advantages and Disadvantages of
ADR - ADR Times. ADR Times. https://adrtimes.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-adr/)
(Agrawal, A. (2024, August 11). Advantages and disadvantages of alternative dispute
resolution. LawBhoomi. https://lawbhoomi.com/advantages-and-disadvantages-of-
alternative-dispute-resolution/)

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION IN ENVIRONMENTAL AND NATURAL

RESOURCE DISPUTES: NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL PERSPECTIVES. Journal
of the Indian Law Institute, 59(1), 26–56. https://www.jstor.org/stable/26826589