Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) provide efficient, confidential, and legally recognised mechanisms for resolving commercial disputes outside traditional court litigation.
Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, arbitration in India has evolved into a structured dispute resolution framework aligned with international standards. The firm advises and represents clients in domestic and international arbitration proceedings, interim relief applications, enforcement actions, and arbitration-related court proceedings.
Arbitration in India is governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which incorporates principles of the UNCITRAL Model Law.
The statute provides for:
India is also a signatory to the New York Convention, ensuring enforceability of foreign awards across jurisdictions.
Judicial developments have strengthened the pro-arbitration approach of Indian courts, limiting unnecessary judicial interference and encouraging expeditious resolution of disputes.
Arbitration counsel is involved in drafting arbitration clauses, structuring claims and defences, conducting evidence, and representing parties before arbitral tribunals and courts.
Effective arbitration practice requires procedural clarity, commercial understanding, and familiarity with Sections 9, 11, 34, and enforcement proceedings under the Act.
Mediation and conciliation are non-adjudicatory dispute resolution processes aimed at facilitating negotiated settlements with the assistance of a neutral third party.
These mechanisms assist parties in resolving disputes while preserving business relationships.
Ad hoc arbitration is conducted under procedures agreed upon by the parties. Institutional arbitration is administered by recognised arbitral institutions under established procedural rules.
Selection of the appropriate model depends on the nature and complexity of the dispute.
The firm approaches arbitration matters with emphasis on procedural compliance and enforceability.
Indian jurisprudence has established that unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator by one party in a bilateral commercial dispute may be legally unsustainable.
The Supreme Court in:
has clarified the requirement of neutrality and independence of arbitrators under Section 12(5) read with the Seventh Schedule of the Act.
Assistance is provided in matters relating to appointment disputes and drafting of arbitration clauses consistent with current legal principles.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
The 1996 Act replaced the earlier fragmented arbitration regime and was enacted based on the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration.
Key Features:
This statute marked India’s transition toward a globally harmonised arbitration framework.
Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority
The Supreme Court expanded and structured the concept of “public policy” under Section 34. While this initially broadened judicial review, it laid the foundation for later restriction.
Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015
This amendment was a turning point in Indian arbitration law.
Key Reforms:
Reinforcing Judgment:
Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. v. NHAI
The Court clarified that post-2015 amendment, courts cannot reappreciate evidence under Section 34.
This phase marked India’s serious commitment toward reducing court interference.
This period transformed arbitrator appointment law in India.
TRF Ltd v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd
Held that if a named arbitrator (e.g., Managing Director) is ineligible under Section 12(5), he cannot nominate another arbitrator.
Principle: “Once ineligible, always ineligible — including power to appoint.”
Perkins Eastman Architects DPC v. HSCC (India) Ltd
Expanded TRF principle. Held that a party interested in the dispute cannot unilaterally appoint a sole arbitrator.
Even if contract permits unilateral appointment, such clause becomes legally vulnerable.
This judgment effectively ended unilateral appointment clauses in bilateral disputes.
Bharat Broadband Network Ltd v. United Telecoms Ltd
Clarified that:
This ensured neutrality and independence of arbitrators as a non-negotiable principle.
Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2019
Key Objectives:
This amendment aimed to move India from ad hoc culture toward institutional framework.
Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading Corporation
Clarified:
Strengthened pro-arbitration referral policy.
Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2021
Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Ltd
Recognised enforceability of emergency arbitrator awards under Indian law, strengthening institutional arbitration credibility.
In Re: Interplay Between Arbitration Agreements and the Indian Stamp Act
Held that:
This significantly reduced procedural obstruction.
1996 → Foundational framework
2015 → Structural reform & reduced interference
2017–2019 → Neutrality & elimination of unilateral appointment
2019 → Institutional strengthening
2020 → Arbitrability clarification
2021 → Enforcement protection
2023 → Technical obstruction removal
Indian arbitration law has evolved into a system emphasising neutrality, minimal court intervention, enforceability, and institutional growth.
Arbitration provides a commercially efficient mechanism for resolving domestic and cross-border disputes while ensuring legal finality.
For further information regarding arbitration advisory, appointment disputes, or arbitral representation, the office may be contacted for scheduling a consultation.