ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION THE SOCIAL MECHANISM AIDING INDIAN JUDICIARY By - Ramashankar Dashrath Singh
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
THE SOCIAL MECHANISM AIDING INDIAN
JUDICIARY
Authored By - Ramashankar Dashrath Singh
Address - House No. 901, Viju Sheth
Building,
Sai Colony, Kon-Gaon, Kalyan-Bhiwandi
Road.
Bhiwandi, Thane, Maharashtra - 421311
Mobile No. - +91-8976534543
ABSTRACT
The conventional system of justice delivery is deeply flawed;
as a result of which there is a backlog of pending cases in the Indian Courts.
The judicial infrastructure is inadequate and is on the verge of a collapse. It
was imperative that an alternate innovative mechanism be provided to cater to
the needs of the society. Settlement of disputes through reference to a third
party is a part of the volksgeist of India since times immemorial. A unique
system of Alternative Dispute Resolution (hereafter referred to as ADR) was
introduced. India has put in place a progressive piece of legislation which is
essentially based on the Model Law and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. But how
will the various forms of ADR help in reducing the burden of the judiciary?
Should we resort to ADR? Has this mechanism proved to be effective and has the
Legislature made any reforms in this aspect? These are some of the key issues
discussed in this Article along with Origin, Issues & Need of ADR in India
with respect to Judicial precedents & Legislative bodies regulating ADR.
The Article will also focus on benefits & contemporary challenges and the
future of ADRS in India & at the International level. There are some
Suggestions for improving mechanisms of Indian Judiciary & ADRS so that the
ultimate purpose of both the bodies shall be achieved i.e., to secure the ends
of justice.
KEYWORDS: Judiciary; ADR; IDRC;
IIArb; IIMed; IIDR; Arbitration; Mediation; Conciliation; Negotiation; Lok
Adalat; Volksgeist; Justice.
INTRODUCTION:
Justice is the foundation
and the focus of every civilized society. The quest for justice was an ideal
that the human race aspired to down the line for decades. Dispute resolution is
one of the Indian judiciary’s major functions and is essential to a stable
society. The Government of India operates through various organs and the
judiciary is directly responsible for the administration of justice. The
judiciary of India is a system of courts that interpret and apply the law in
the Republic of India. India uses a common law system, first introduced by the
British East India Company and with influence from other colonial powers and
Indian princely states, as well as practices from ancient and medieval times.
The constitution provides for a single unified judiciary in India.
As we all know there are a few
methods available for two parties to resolve disputes. The first and most
common approach is to resolve disputes through courts when a dispute occurs
between two individuals belonging to the same government, there is the same
sense for the dispute to be resolved by the parties through the courts set up
by that country’s law. Our conventional judicial system has become outdated and
there has also been a need for another structure to sustain our judicial system
as a replacement or alternative for settling disputes between peoples. With the
rising development of the nation the burden falls over the judiciary. Our
judicial system has some drawbacks, such as an overburdened court,
time-consuming, requiring a costly technical process with a low population
ratio of judges, and unfilled vacancies with long procedural and pendency of
cases. India has the largest number of pending court cases in the world. Many
judges and government officials have said that the pendency of cases is the
biggest challenge before the Indian judiciary. According to a 2018 Niti Aayog
strategy paper, at the then-prevailing rate of disposal of cases in our courts,
it would take more than 324 years to clear the backlog. With the cases taking
time in courts, it leads to delays in the delivery of justice for both victims
and accused. Pendency of court cases in India is the delay in the disposal of
cases (lawsuits) to provide justice to the aggrieved person or organization by
judicial courts at all levels. In 2022, the total number of pending cases of
all types and at all levels rose to around 50 million or 5 crores, including
over 1,69,000 court cases pending for more than 30 years in District and High
Courts. 4.3 crore out of 5 crores cases, i.e., more than 85% cases are pending
in District Courts as of December 2022.
DATA OF PENDING CASES -
INDIAN COURTS:
|
PARTICULARS
|
CIVIL
|
CRIMINAL
|
TOTAL
|
|
0 to 01 Years
|
2936708 (26.74%)
|
8292158 (25.74%)
|
11228866 (26%)
|
|
01 to 03 Years
|
2870582 (26.14%)
|
8209173 (25.48%)
|
11079755 (25.65%)
|
|
03 to 05 Years
|
2242201 (20.42%)
|
6289063 (19.52%)
|
8531264 (19.75%)
|
|
05 to 10 Years
|
2066413 (18.82%)
|
6109117 (18.96%)
|
8175530 (18.93%)
|
|
10 to 20 Years
|
710713 (6.47%)
|
2792354 (8.67%)
|
3503067 (8.11%)
|
|
20 to 30 Years
|
118172 (1.3%)
|
442753 (1.3%)
|
560925 (1.3%)
|
|
Above 30 Years
|
36151 (0.33%)
|
79504 (0.25%)
|
115655 (0.27%)
|
|
Total
|
10980940
|
32214122
|
43195062
|
Source of table: Data of Pending Cases from National Judicial
Data Grid[1]
Even in this 21st century
there is a lack of required law for establishing social norms and peace. Our
judiciary system should give scope to such alternative methods. To fasten the
process of resolution, Alternative Dispute Resolution System (ADRS) plays an
evolutionary role. With the advent of the idea of Conflict Management via ADR,
a new, less adversarial method of settling legal disputes has become available.
Legally speaking, a lawsuit is a “lis
inter partes,” however the Indian legal system has developed an alternative
to adversarial litigation known as the ADR Mechanism. As the saying goes, “The spirit of the law, not its letter, is
what gives life to justice.” —Lord Justice
Earl Warren.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
SYSTEM:
Alternative
Dispute Resolution which includes various methods of settling a dispute without
getting into the intricacies of the court. It is a method where parties try to
resolve their disputes privately in front of a third-person expert. The
decision is binding on the parties like the decision of the court. The ADR
system works on the principles of justice, legal aid and speedy trial as given
under Article 39A of the Indian
Constitution. Even Section 89 of the
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides settling disputes by way of ADR. The
proceedings are flexible and creative. It provides satisfying solutions with
reduced cost and time and thus, is an emerging field in Law. The article deals
with an act on arbitration and conciliation known as Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The parties to a
disagreement can save time and money by using ADR techniques including
mediation and arbitration. These processes also have the added benefit of
allowing the people involved to lessen their animosity toward one another,
reclaim some measure of control over the situation, come to terms with the
decision, settle the dispute amicably, and improve their sense of fairness.
Disputes are best settled in private settings, where they can be handled in a
way that is more practical, cost-effective, and efficient. There are few
distinct forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR): Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, Negotiation and The Lok Adalat.
HISTORY OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION:
Third-party
settlement of disputes is a part of ancient Indian ethos and culture. However,
the settlement of disputes through the institution of the judiciary is a little
over a century old and is a result of British rule in India. Despite the long
history of the settlement of disputes by alternative means in our country, the
first statutory recognition given to domestic arbitration was given by way of
the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940.
Retired law
professor of Osmania University, Dr. V.
Nageswara Rao presented an overview of conciliation proceedings under the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act,1996 before the Law Commission of India. He
stated that the settlement of disputes through reference to a third party has
been part of the “volksgeist” or
body of customs of India for time immemorial. There are basically two types of
arbitration proceedings which are conducted. Domestic Arbitration proceedings
which are conducted between two Indians & International Commercial
Arbitration proceedings which are conducted between the parties, where at least
one of the parties is an individual who is a national of, or habitually
resident in, any country other than India or a company, or an association, or a
body of individuals whose central management and control is exercised in any
country other than India or the government of a foreign country. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996,
was passed followed by the UNCITRAL
Model in order to encourage the establishment of Arbitration, Conciliation
and other alternative dispute resolution.
OVERVIEW & KEY HIGHLIGHTS OF THE
INDIAN ARBITRATION ACT, 1940:
The Indian Arbitration Act, 1940[2] dealt solely with the previously
uncodified body of law concerning domestic arbitration proceedings. The
objective of the 1940 act was to consolidate and amend the law relating to
arbitration.
?
It gave wide discretionary and supervisory powers to the courts
allowing them to regularly intervene in arbitration proceedings.
?
It also severely limited the freedom of the parties to choose
their preferred means of settlement by imposing a number of regulations.
?
Section 3 of the 1940 Act, imposes certain implied terms and
conditions that were required to be present in any arbitration agreement unless
those terms were specifically contracted away.
?
The 1940 Act, also grants wide power to the court in matters of
appointment or removal of arbitrators and allows the court to modify or remit
the award and also pass interim orders.
From the
above highlights, it is clear that the arbitral tribunal constituted under the
1940 Act had no real powers but rather acted as a proxy for the court.
THE ARBITRATION & CONCILIATION
ACT, 1996:
The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996[3] repeals the Arbitration
Act, 1940; The
Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937[4]; and The Foreign Awards (Recognition and
Enforcement) Act, 1961[5] and reformulates the law
in one consolidated statute. It also seeks to amend and consolidate the law
relating to domestic arbitration, international arbitration and the enforcement
of foreign arbitral awards.
The Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 is
divided into three parts as:-
?
Part I of the act is a reproduction of the Model Law which deals
with rules regarding practice and procedure before the arbitral tribunal.
?
Part II deals with the recognition and enforcement of foreign
awards. Part II is divided into two chapters.
?
Chapter I concerns award made pursuant to agreements under the New
York Convention.
?
Chapter II deals with the enforcement of foreign awards under the
Geneva Convention.
?
Part III deals with conciliation proceedings.
UNCITRAL MODEL LAW:
UNCITRAL stands for United
Nations Commission on International Trade Law. It adopted the UNCITRAL
Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration on 21 June 1985. The
objective of the Model Law is to provide a set of rules which would facilitate
the settlement of International Commercial disputes by bringing about uniformity
in the laws of member countries in reforming and modernising their national
laws on arbitration.
Key Highlights: It covers every stage in
the arbitration process as:-
?
Beginning from the recognition of the need to curtail judicial
intervention to the formation of the arbitration agreement.
?
Appointment of the arbitral tribunal
?
Any challenges to such appointment
?
Basic rules of conduct of arbitration proceedings
?
Termination of proceedings by the making of the award
?
Finality of awards and grounds on which the arbitral award
challenged before the national courts.
The Model Law
also forms the basis for the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 in
keeping with India’s International obligations.
INDIAN DISPUTE RESOLUTION CENTRE
(IDRC):
Indian Dispute Resolution Centre (IDRC)[6] is one of a kind of
Arbitral, Mediation and Conciliation Institution. IDRC is also registered with
NITI Aayog and empanelled with the Ministry of Law & Justice, Government of
India. It was inaugurated by Justice A.K. Sikri, former Judge of the Supreme
Court of India. The IDRC provides a unique blend of both offline as well as
online ADR platforms and has its own indigenously developed e-ADR software.
The IDRC envisions signals of our continued
passion to spearhead an era of development and expansion, both for the Centre
and the global ADR ecosystem. IDRC
aspires to continue to be a provider of international-class institutional
support as a neutral and independent venue for the conduct of Domestic and
International Arbitrations, and other ADR proceedings.
Today, IDRC
is the leading digital Arbitration Institution in India. It has its Affiliate
Centres not only pan India, but also in Asia Pacific and Europe, handling
hundreds of domestic and international arbitrations. IDRC also provides
services of Expert Determination and Early Neutral Evaluation, as well as
education and training in alternative dispute resolution mechanisms through its
Indian Institute of Arbitration – IIArb,
Indian Institute of Mediation (IIMed) and Indian Institute of Dispute
Resolution (IIDR).
MEDIATION BILL, 2021 [“DRAFT BILL”]:
Mediation at an Alternate
Dispute Redressal [ADR] offers an informal, simple, non-adversarial approach to
resolve predominantly civil, commercial and family disputes arising between parties
and can help to lessen the burden of Courts. To expand the scope and reach of
this form of ADR, the Department of Legal Affairs, Government of India, has
proposed a draft Mediation Bill, 2021
[“Draft Bill”][7]
on 29 October 2021 to facilitate timely and consensual resolution of disputes
and serve the interest of stakeholders as an effective alternative remedy.
The Draft
Bill has been introduced with the primary objective to promote, encourage and
facilitate mediation, especially institutional mediation, for resolution of
disputes, enforce domestic and international mediation settlement agreements,
provide for a body for the registration of mediators, to encourage community
mediation and make online mediation an acceptable and cost-effective process.
Further, to
strengthen the legal framework on international dispute settlement, on 7 August
2019, India became one of the first signatories to the United Nations
Convention on Enforcement of International Settlement Agreements resulting from
Meditation [“The Singapore Convention"]. Pursuant to this, it was
considered expedient that India gives effect to the Singapore Convention by
introducing a standalone mediation law for the enforcement of international
settlement agreements.
The Draft
Bill aims to organise mediation in India and provides for the regulation of all
its aspects such as mediation agreements, the mediation process, appointment
and termination of the mandate of a mediator, the mode of conduction of a
proceeding, settlement agreements executed as a consequence of mediation and
setting up of the Mediation Council of India. The Draft Bill also recognizes
and provides for the enforcement of international mediation settlement
agreements. The Draft Bill aims to facilitate and promote mediation in India, particularly
institutional mediation for the resolution of disputes, encourage community
mediation, and make online mediation an acceptable and cost effective process
with confidential proceedings & impartial mediators having sole objective
to secure the ends of justice.
PRINCIPAL FEATURES OF THE DRAFT
MEDIATION BILL:
?
Mandatory pre-litigation mediation and settlement under section
6(1) of the Draft Bill
?
Recognition and enforcement of Domestic and International
Mediation Settlement Agreements
?
90 days Time-limit for completion of mediation under Section 20 of
the Draft Bill. Additional period of 90 days with the consent of parties is
also permitted.
?
Recognition of institutional mediation
?
Recognition to online mediation governed by the provisions of the Information
Technology Act, 2000.
?
Establishment of the Mediation Council of India
?
Community mediation
OBJECTIVES OF THE BILL:
?
It provides an undeviating procedure to be followed for mediation
in the country and also explains the meaning of specific legal terms.
?
The ultimate objective of the Bill is to educate people about
mediation, which is a less time-consuming and more cost-effective method to
resolve disputes, in order to reduce the number of pending cases in court.
?
The Bill also deals with pre-litigation mediation, which clarifies
the position of such mediation.
?
It further gives the power and functions of courts and tribunals
in the mediation process.
?
Mediation involves an unprejudiced third party acting as a
mediator. Currently, there is no authority to ensure that the principles of
confidentiality, neutrality, impartiality, and participation of parties are
achieved. But the Bill, if passed and enacted, will deal with such situations
and clarify the position of mediation proceedings and their relevance.
ISSUES IN MEDIATION BILL, 2021
[“DRAFT BILL”]:
?
The Bill does not provide qualifications of a trained mediator nor
is there any reference to the 'capacity to mediate'.
?
The most important aspect of mediation and arbitration is
"party autonomy". However, mandatory pre-litigation mediation
mechanism would defeat the essence of mediation where the parties are unwilling
to mediate.
?
Principle of confidentiality is also a fundamental aspect of
mediation proceedings. However, the requirement in Section 18 of the Draft Bill
that the mediator shall communicate 'the view of each party to the other to the
extent agreed to by them' could give rise to possible conflict of interest,
besides striking at the root of the requirement of confidentiality of the
mediation process
?
The Draft Bill does not address as to what provisions would govern
an International mediation that takes place in India but relates to
non-commercial disputes that have arisen under a foreign law, such mediation
not being covered by either Part I or Part III of the Draft Bill.
?
The Draft Bill does not specify whether a Mediation Service
Provider can be a company.
?
The Draft Bill provides that a domestic mediated settlement may be
challenged on the ground of 'gross impropriety', without making any venture to
define the term or specify its outline or profile.
?
The consequences of non-registration of a Mediated Settlement
Agreement have not been mentioned under the Draft Bill.
BENEFITS OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION:
With so many
cases pending in Indian courts, ADR has become increasingly important in the
country.
?
In order to alleviate the workload of the Indian judicial system,
the country’s alternative dispute resolution process employs tried and true
methods backed by science.
?
Arbitration, conciliation, mediation, negotiation, and Lok Adalat
are only few of the alternative dispute resolution methods available through
ADR. In this context, negotiation refers to parties engaging in mutual
self-counseling in an effort to resolve the disagreement; nevertheless, this
method is not recognized by Indian law.
?
Articles 14 and 21, which guarantee everyone the same protections
under the law and the right to life and liberty, are also the cornerstones of
ADR.
?
Motivated by a desire to uphold the preamble’s ideals of social,
economic, and political fairness, ADR seeks to resolve disputes amicably and
keep the society it serves intact.
?
Equal justice and the right to free legal representation
guaranteed by Article 39-A, Directive Principle of State Policy, are two
additional goals of alternative dispute resolution (DPSP).
?
Alternative dispute resolution has been effective in reducing the
backlog of cases at all judicial levels.
?
Over the course of the last three years, Lok Adalats have closed
more than 50 lakh cases annually on average.
ISSUES IN ADR MECHANISM IN INDIA:
There are
some issues with the ADR mechanism in India.
?
Generally, arbitrators can only resolve disputes that involve
money.
?
They cannot issue orders requiring one party to do something or
refrain from doing something.
?
They cannot change the title to the property, either.
?
Also, some of the safeguards designed to protect parties in court
may not be present in ADR.
?
It cannot give remedies like punishment, imprisonment, injunction,
etc. which are given in courts.
?
Also, other issues in the ADR mechanism in India include a limited
opportunity for judicial review of an arbitrator’s decision. While a large
arbitration service could, if it so chose, have some kind of process for
internal appeals, the decision is usually final and binding, and can only be
reviewed by a court in limited cases.[8]
INDIAN JUDICIARY ON ADR MECHANISM:
The judiciary in India is
the real point of the provision of justice. Resolving conflicts is one of the
key factors for society’s peaceful existence. Arbitration, the ADR style, is
accepted as an instrument of dispute settlement by the Indian judiciary.
Originally, arbitration was regulated by the Indian Arbitration Act, 1940. The
courts were mainly concerned about the control of the arbitral tribunals, and
they were very keen to see if the arbitrator had exceeded his authority in
determining the matter referred to him for arbitration.
The judicial process in
India is not only expensive for an ordinary person but also it takes years and
years to deliver justice. To address the much-criticized delay in the delivery
of justice, the implementation of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
mechanisms such as Lok Adalats, Arbitration, Mediation, and Conciliation were
considered and followed with praiseworthy results afterward. The judiciary has
figured prominently in developing and transforming India into an
arbitration-friendly country, and the day is not far away when India will be a
significant contender in hosting international arbitrations. When a party
challenges an arbitration ruling, the Supreme Court of India and different High
Courts have taken a hands-off attitude.
In recent years, Indian
courts have repeatedly embraced an arbitration-friendly attitude. There have
been numerous cases where courts have sustained arbitration agreements despite
small flaws, thereby recognising the parties’ decision to have their problems
resolved through arbitration. Despite adopting a pro-arbitration stance, the
Supreme Court approved an arbitration agreement despite an error, concluding
that because the parties’ purpose to arbitrate was obvious, the Court can make
the arbitration agreement viable even if it contains certain faults.
The Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee,
Supreme Court of India has sought to tie together the various strands that have
been the subject-matter of debate from time to time as regards the benefits
and/or suitability of ADR methods of dispute resolution, by way of various
Regional Conferences organized across the length and breadth of the country.
Conferences have been successfully held at Guwahati, Lucknow, Jammu, Bangalore,
and Mumbai. These Conferences have witnessed brainstorming discussions of the
strategies for integration of mediation within the conventional Court System.
It is these exploring and inspirational discussions held at the Regional Conferences
that have fructified into this National Conference on Mediation.
The first and
foremost task before the Committee was to train the mediators. The Committee
decided 40-Hours Mediation Training and 10 actual mediations as the essential
qualification required for a mediator to be able to be entrusted with the task
of mediating disputes. Further, it was felt by the Committee that various
schools of thought were prevalent in the country regarding the topics,
curriculum and methodology for training of the mediators. The Committee thought
it appropriate that a uniform training manual adaptable to local situations,
but at the same time assimilating the cream of various mediation centres, was
essential to be uniformly followed throughout the country in order to streamline
the functioning of mediation in India. Based on that, a Sub-Committee was
constituted under the able guidance of Hon'ble
Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph (former Judge, Supreme Court of India and Member,
MCPC) to lay down a uniform Mediation
Training Manual of India.[9]
This Manual
is the product of a team work and intellectual exercise of the experts. The Sub
Committee has accomplished a major project of the Committee, initiated by the
visionary Judge, Hon'ble Mr. Justice
S.B. Sinha, carried forward by Hon'ble
Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendran, who conceptualized and popularized mediation,
and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Dalveer
Bhandari, under whose able guidance mediation has become a vast movement in
the country.
“The Law Commission of India in its 129th
Report recommended that it should be made obligatory for the Court to refer
disputes to Arbitration / Mediation for settlement”.
1. In Tamil Nadu v/s. Union of India the Supreme Court held: “In certain countries of the world where
Arbitration has been successful to the extent that over 90 percent of the cases
are settled out of court, there is a requirement that the parties to the suit
must indicate their intention to refer to mediation during the pendency of the
trail.”
2. In the case of Emkay Global Financial Service Limited v/s. Giridhar Sondhi[10] it was held that
Arbitration & Mediation aims at a speedy resolution of disputes.
3. In the landmark case of Afcons Infra Ltd v/s. M/S Cherian Varkey Constructions
(2010)[11] the Supreme Court of
India held that all cases relating to trade, commerce and contracts, consumer
disputes and even tortious liability could normally be mediated.
4. Another landmark
decision by the Supreme Court was arrived at on 22nd Feb, 2013 in the case of B. S. Krishnamurthy v/s. B. S. Nagaraj[12], wherein it directed the
Family Courts to strive to settle matrimonial disputes via mediation and to
also introduce parties to mediation centres with consent of the parties,
especially in matters concerning maintenance, child custody, and others.
In fact,
it has been noted that during the proceedings of important cases such as the
one regarding the demolition of the Babri Masjid, the Chief Justice of India
himself has stepped in to facilitate mediation between the disputed parties.
As Mr. Nani
Palkhivala the Indian Jurist & Economist said “a court of law is like an
ancient castle, constantly under repair. There comes a time when it no longer
pays to patch it up and it is better to resort to a new, compact house built on
modern lines”.
ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR)
– NEED OF THE HOUR:
To overcome the delay and
to provide effective justice to the consumer of justice, it has become
imperative to resort to ADR with a view to bringing an end to litigation
between the parties at an early date. In
the words of Abraham Lincon: “Discourage litigation. Persuade your neighbors,
make compositions whenever you can. As a peacemaker one should encourage being
a good human being, to refrain from resorting to lies. There will still be
business enough”.
The legal principle of ‘Justice Delayed is Justice Denied’ as
quoted by William Gladstone clearly
signifies the importance of timely fashion of redressal for a legal dispute.
The principle forms the foundation for the right to a speedy trial and
articulates that if the existing system is unable to deliver first hand justice
at a faster pace, then it is equivalent to having no remedy at all. Legislature
must understand the need of Mediation Bill also citizens all over the country
must discuss with the Legislative body about the need of Mediation Bill to
secure the ends of justice.
CONCLUSION & SUGGESTIONS:
As the
dominance of commercial elements are increasing and service character
diminishing, and the hierarchical system of law cannot meet the growing demands
for justice, people are opting for alternatives. It has been observed since the
previous decade Alternative Dispute Resolution has been catching up and is
viewed as a successful instrument in diminishing the load off the judiciary.
The most
popular forum of Alternative Dispute Resolution is arbitration which is akin to
litigation; other forums of ADR should also be encouraged and given due
importance which will help in timely and peaceful disposal of disputes. The
Legislature should enact statutes covering all aspects of ADR. The Conciliation
part of the 1996 Act should be brought into effect immediately. Alternate
methods such as negotiation and mediation should be cheered as they are the
best, effective, informal and autonomous methods of resolution.
Alternative
Dispute Resolution as an instrument should not be confined only to address
international commercial transactions, state, private or foreign business
firms, inter- corporation conflicts or inter- country disputes but should be
advanced and used as an effective tool for solving problems of the middle class
society and conflicts amongst the poor.
Alternative
Dispute Resolution in India had embarked upon a journey with the aim of
facilitating access to justice and to relieve court congestion. ADR must be
adopted in order to resolve common disputes of all categories of people. The
legal community and social personalities must support and develop a positive
attitude to rely on the ADR movement to achieve complete justice, the goal of
the Constitution and rule of law, which will go a long way in reducing the load
on judiciary.