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.

Limitations of Alternative Dispute Resolution:

Numerous disadvantages are blocking the approach of winning dispute
resolution and often distressing both parties attitude to reconcile for a
comprised decision some of the disadvantages are:

(a) Uneven Negotiating Command

In convinced situations, one side is capable to have power over the other. For
that reason, a noteworthy discrepancy of power exists. E.g.: Employment and
annulment cases, making the courts an improved alternative for a weak party.

(b) Short of Legal Expertise:

Where an argument involves complicated legal points a mediator or arbitrator

is doubtful to have the same legal proficiency and knowledge as a judge. The
dispute can be of a range of situations such as viable conflicts, social conflicts,
legal conflicts, and many others which necessitate dedicated mediators. Most
of the cases, the mediator does not acquire a judge's perspective.

(c) No Organization of Specific mock-up :

It is not easy to envisage the conclusion of a dispute determined through ADR

as there is no method of precedent. Therefore, it is easier to get evidence from
the other party in a lawsuit. Short of system fallout in the restricted prediction
of outcomes.
(d) Enforceability:

Usually, ADR is not lawfully compulsory making any award complicated to

implement Legal arbitration has some kind of course of action for internal
appeals, which enables the assessment as an obligatory and only issue to the
assessment of Court.

(e) Required Court Action:

The arbitrator’s verdict can necessitate a court action if one of the parties
declines to acknowledge the arbitrator's conclusion. This would not only
generate pandemonium but also an obligatory review by the court. Thus, ADR
occasionally elevates the question of biasness of the arbitrator’s
pronouncement. Also, there is a very flawed panorama for judicial assessment
of an arbitrator’s decision.

(f) Limits Discovery Process:

ADR normally happening without the fortification obtainable parties in

litigation, such as those rules administrated during innovation. Courts
commonly allocate an enormous arrangement of leeway in the sighting
procedure, which is not vigorous in substitute dispute resolution.
ARBITRATION
Introduction
Disputes happen frequently between parties in the world of business and in
today's fast- paced commercial world, time is nothing less valuable than
money. Both parties suffer losses if the dispute becomes the victim of a long-
drawn, complex court battle. The solution to this comes in the form of
Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms that have eased and
simplified the resolution of disputes between parties. Arbitration is a key ADR
method that can be historically traced to the village panchayat days, when the
elders used to resolve disputes between persons based on principles of natural
justice. In simple words, arbitration is a method of resolving disputes between
parties without going to court.

Meaning
Arbitration is the most traditional form of private dispute resolution.
Arbitration is a binding procedure. It is often "administered" by a private
organization that maintains lists of available arbitrators and provide rules
under which the arbitration will be conducted. Such organizations can also
manage the arbitration in whole or in part. Parties often select arbitrators on
the basis of substantive expertise.

Arbitration is adjudicatory, as opposed to advisory, because of the fact that the

arbitrator (usually a retired judge or attorney) renders a decision at the end of
an arbitration hearing, and that decision is final and binding, subject only to a
very limited court review. Arbitration is sometimes referred to as "non-
binding" if the parties agree to make it so, but that is really a misnomer. Think
of arbitration as a binding, adjudicatory process.

Arbitration is outside the court settlement of a dispute by one or more (odd

number) persons who are appointed as arbitrators by both the parties.
According to Section 2(1)(a) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
"Arbitration means any arbitration whether or not administered by permanent
arbitral institution". In other words, any form of arbitration irrespective of its
nature has been recognised statutorily in India by bringing such arbitration
 under the ambit of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996. It consists of a
simplified trial, with simplified rules of evidence and with no discovery.
Arbitration hearings are usually not a matter of public record. The arbitral
award is binding on the parties just like a court decree or order.

Types of arbitration
There are various types of arbitration depending upon the nationality of the
parties, the arbitral award or the arbitrators involved. They are discussed as
follows:

Domestic Arbitration
Domestic arbitration occurs when both parties involved in the
dispute are Indian, and the arbitration proceedings take place in
India. While the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, does not
explicitly define domestic arbitration, it is implicitly governed by
Section 2(2). Key characteristics include:
 The proceedings are conducted within Indian territory.
 Indian procedural and substantive laws apply.
 Parties agree to resolve disputes arising within India.
Domestic arbitration is commonly used for resolving disputes in
business contracts, employment agreements, and property disputes
within India.
International Arbitration
International arbitration involves disputes that transcend national
boundaries. This type of arbitration occurs outside the domestic
territory due to:
 A contractual clause specifying arbitration in a foreign country.
 Foreign elements in the dispute, such as parties from different
nations or transactions conducted internationally.
The applicable law—Indian or foreign—depends on the
circumstances leading to the arbitration. International arbitration
provides flexibility for parties to choose a neutral venue and
governing laws, making it ideal for cross-border transactions and
multinational agreements.
International Commercial Arbitration (ICA)
According to Section 2(1)(f) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
international commercial arbitration arises from a dispute involving
a commercial contract where at least one party is:
 A foreign national or entity.
 Residing or headquartered in a foreign country.
 Managed by foreign individuals.
Under Indian law, ICA applies when:
 The arbitration takes place in India.
 At least one party is a foreign entity.
However, Part I of the Act does not apply to ICAs conducted outside
India. The 2015 Amendment clarified that companies incorporated in
India, even if controlled by foreign entities, are considered Indian
entities. For instance, in TDM Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. UE
Development India Pvt. Ltd. (2008), the Supreme Court ruled
that companies registered in India cannot be classified as foreign
entities for ICA.

Ad Hoc Arbitration
Ad hoc arbitration is the type of arbitration where the parties mutually agree
to resolve their disputes by arbitration procee₩ngs conducted by mutually
appointed arbitrators but not by an institution. This is one of the most
common forms of arbitration in India where the parties themselves agree to
and arrange for arbitration. Here, in this method of arbitration, both the
parties and the arbitrators mutually and independently decide the procedures
of arbitration, without the involvement of an arbitral institution. Example:
When the parties decide to keep the arbitration seat in India, the dispute
would be resolved as per the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996

Ad-hoc arbitration is the most common form of arbitration in India. It

is characterised by its flexibility and cost-effectiveness. In this
method:
 Parties mutually agree to resolve disputes without institutional
involvement.
 Rules and procedures are decided by the parties themselves.
 Arbitration is tailored to the specific needs of the case.
Key provisions under Indian law include:
 Section 6: Parties or tribunals can seek administrative assistance
from institutions or individuals.
 Section 11: Arbitrators’ fees are determined by an arbitral institution
as per Schedule 4.

Advantages of ad-hoc arbitration:

 Low cost compared to institutional arbitration.

 Greater control over procedures.
 Challenges:
 Lack of pre-determined rules may lead to delays.
 Requires experienced arbitrators to manage proceedings effectively.

Fast-Track Arbitration

Fast-track arbitration was introduced by the Arbitration and

Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, to address delays and
inefficiencies in traditional arbitration processes. Key features
include:
 Time-Bound Resolution: The arbitrator must deliver the final
award within six months of the dispute being referred.
 Sole Arbitrator: Parties appoint a single arbitrator with mutual
consent.
 Simplified Procedures: Relies primarily on written submissions;
oral hearings are conducted only when necessary.
Fast-track arbitration is governed by Section 29B of the Act and is
particularly effective for commercial and trade disputes requiring
speedy resolution.
Advantages:
 Saves time and costs.
 Reduces procedural complexities.

Institutional Arbitration
Institutional Arbitration is the form of arbitration where an institute, which has
been set up for the purpose of settling disputes by arbitration or other ADR
methods, is employed to conduct arbitration. Such institutes may be national
or international in character and they usually lay down their own rules of
arbitration. But such rules cannot override the provisions of the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996. These institutes maintain a panel of arbitrators
from which arbitrators are recommended to the parties. Besides that, these
institutes also offer administrative and consultancy services. So, with the
proper infrastructure and experience that these institutes bring to an arbitral
proceedings, some parties really find institutional arbitration beneficial. Some
of the prominent institutes that offer institutional arbitration are as follows:

• Chartered Institute of Arbitrators,

* The London Court of International Arbitration,

* The National Arbitration Forum USA,

* Singapore International Arbitration Centre,

* The International Court of Arbitration,

* International Arbitration and Mediation Centre, Hyderabad

* Delhi International Arbitration Centre

* Permanent Court of Arbitration

Emergency Arbitration
Emergency arbitration is a form of arbitration where interim relief is given by
the arbitral tribunal to a party who wants to protect their assets and/or
evidence from being otherwise lost or altered. It can be roughly compared to
the concept of interim injunctions granted by civil courts. In India, there is no
mention of the term `'emergency arbitration' in the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996 till date, and regarding the enforceability of the same,
the picture is still unclear. But the concept of emergency arbitration has been
adopted in India bỷ various arbitral institutions like Delhi International
Arbitration Centre, Court of Arbitration of the International Chambers of
Commerce-India, International Commercial Arbitration (ICA), Madras High
Court Arbitration Centre (MHCAC), Mumbai Centre for International
Arbitration etc. within their rules.

Utility of the Arbitration

There are so many advantages in solving dispute through Arbitration or any

other Alternative Dispute Resolution method. One of the benefits is less
formality involved in these processes. The cost of these processes is also low
compared to traditional judicial system where a suit is going on for decades.

In arbitration process, parties freely can choose their place where suit will be
Instituted. Hence, we can say that arbitration process is being encouraged
because of free will of parties also. Besides free will, both the parties
voluntarily participate in dispute solving methods. Since Alternative Dispute
Resolution is equally important to our traditional court system, the study of
Alternative Dispute Resolution should be promoted. In law courses, subject of
Alternative Dispute Resolution has been added. Law colleges have added this
subject in their course so that students can acquire this knowledge before
going to court. In their course, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 has been
given utmost importance.

1. Speed and Efficiency

One of the main advantages of arbitration is its speed and efficiency. Unlike
litigation, which can often take years to reach a resolution, Alternative dispute
resolution allows parties to resolve their disputes in a more timely manner.
The process is typically less formal and streamlined, resulting in quicker
decisions.

2. Flexibility

Arbitration offers parties the flexibility to choose their own arbitrator and
decide on the procedural rules that will govern this Alternative dispute
resolution process. This allows the parties to select an arbitrator with expertise
in the relevant area of law and tailor the process to suit their specific needs.

3. Confidentiality

Unlike court proceedings, which are generally open to the public, arbitration
offers a greater level of confidentiality. Parties can keep their disputes private,
protecting sensitive information from becoming public knowledge.

4. Expertise

In arbitration, parties have the opportunity to select an arbitrator with

expertise in the subject matter of the dispute. This ensures that the decision-
maker has a deep understanding of the issues involved, leading to more
informed and specialized decisions.

5. Cost-Effective
Arbitration can be a cost-effective alternative to litigation. Hiring an arbitrator
and conducting the arbitration process incurs costs. but these are frequently
lower than the expenses linked to litigation. Litigation-related costs,
encompassing court fees, attorney fees, and discovery expenses, generally
surpass the financial outlay involved in this Alternative dispute resolution.
Opting for this Alternative dispute resolution can result in significant cost
savings for parties engaged in dispute resolution.

Meaning of arbitrator
As per the dictionary meaning, `An arbitrator is the person who has been
officially chosen to decide between two people or groups who do not agree'. In
other words, an arbitrator can be defined as a person who acts as a neutral
dispute resolution authority, in deciding the issues between the parties in a
dispute. The arbitrator acts as a supreme authority in the process of arbitration
and holds the same position as that of a judge. Hence, he is bound to process
of arbitration follow the principles of natural justice, and act in a just way in
providing justice to the parties.

Qualifications of an Arbitrator
The Indian legislation does not specify the qualifications required to become
an arbitrator. Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the person can only
be appointed as an arbitrator if he is not a minor and is of sound mind. The
arbitrators in India are appointed by the arbitral institutions and associations,
which includes a panel of experts who appoint arbitrators on their
understanding.

Essential qualities that an arbitrator should possess

Arbitration is a process to settle disputes in the commercial arena. But the
process cannot flourish if there are no arbitrators to resolve the issues
between the parties. A person to be appointed as the arbitrator should retain
some specialized skills and qualities to get that superior position and authority
in the arbitral proceedings.

Let's take a look into some of the qualities that a person must possess

Competency

Even though there has been no mention of the essential qualities and
qualifications in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996, the basic
requirements that the person must possess to be appointed as an arbitrator
are that he must have completed the age of majority i.e., he must be more
than 18 years of age and should be of sound mind i.e, not a lunatic and has not
been framed under any charges either of a criminal and a civil nature under
the various provisions of law.

Experience

An arbitrator must have knowledge and experience over the matters in which
he is asked to preside. A mediocre arbitrator can conduct normal arbitral
proceedings but lacks adequacy when it comes to framing the issues or solving
the disputes between the parties. The person must have excelling skills in
examining the facts and pronouncing the judgment, following the due process
of law which can only be attained and achieved with maturity and proficiency
in life. Not only the judicial proceedings but the arbitral BSS proceedings are
also judged and determined on the facts and circumstances of the case. The
facts of the cases can only be ascertained if the person to be appointed as an
arbitrator has been well versed with the functioning of the systems, people,
and the principles of law.

Professionalism

Not only the legal professionals, practitioners, and young lawyers but the
arbitrators should also possess professional behavior. He must keep in his
mind that he is assisting and providing legal aid to the parties in the dispute
and then come to a final and binding conclusion. They should be respectful,
diplomatic, and professional in their work. He is not a judge, so does not have
any inherent powers and his powers and efficacy are derived from respect,
consistency, and diplomacy.
Task management

The person to be appointed as an arbitrator must avail attributes in managing

the tasks and must possess leadership qualities. As the procedure of
arbitration is lengthy and extensive, he should not lose his calm during the
arbitral proceedings. The deprivation in his managing work can challenge his
power as an arbitrator and he can even lose his position because of his
unprofessionalism at the workplace and task management

Legal educational expertise

It would be beneficial in the process of arbitration if a person to be elected as

an arbitrator is from a legal background. The person must be well versed with
the judicial laws of the land and must have credentials for the same. In the
arbitral proceedings, they must justify and state the rationales for their
respective decisions, as the decisions of the arbitrators can be challenged and
reviewed by the judges. The selection of an arbitrator with formal legal
education and legal experience with justiciable credentials will increase his
likelihood of handling the complex questions in the dispute responsibly and
ensuring justice to the parties

Drafting and writing skills

The legal practitioners and young lawyers are always advised to have adequate
writing and drafting skills as they are the ones responsible for drafting the
agreements, contracts, and legal petitions. In the same way, the arbitrator
must have efficient and exemplary writing