Open Access Research Article
ADJUDICATION OF COMMERCIAL DISPUTE IN INDIA UNDER COMMERCIAL COURT ACT,2015
Published Paper
Article Details
ADJUDICATION OF COMMERCIAL DISPUTE
IN INDIA UNDER COMMERCIAL COURT ACT,2015
AUTHORED BY - AMBIKA KUNWAR SISODIYA[1]
& DR GOPI RANGANATH V[2]
CHRIST
(DEEMED TO BE UNIVERSITY)
I.
ABSTRACT
To resolve
commercial disputes up to a specific sum and things linked or incidental to
them, the Commercial Courts Act of 2015 established Commercial Courts,
Commercial Divisions, and Commercial Appellate Divisions within the High
Courts. The Act aims to expedite the resolution of commercial disputes in India
by providing provisions for establishing Commercial Courts at the district
judge level. Commercial and Civil Appellate Courts for regions covered by the
High Courts[3] original civil
jurisdiction. The Act also established the Pre-Institution Mediation and
Settlement Process to resolve commercial disputes. The amended Act's goals are
to decrease the threshold valuation for a business dispute and grant State
Governments the power to establish business courts in areas where district
judges have less judicial jurisdiction The Act mandates that parties must
attempt to resolve their commercial disputes through mediation before pursuing
legal action. The Act additionally requires that every effort be made to
encourage mediation as a conflict resolution method by the court when
considering an appeal against a commercial court order. The Act also creates
Commercial Appellate Courts at the district and high court levels and describes
the data collection and disclosure procedures under the Act. The definition of
a business dispute, how it came to be, the necessity of using commercial
courts, its establishment and purposes, and significant case law are covered in
this Article.[4]
Keywords: Commercial Court, mediation,
Jurisdiction, Dispute Settlement.
I.
Introduction
Since
the 1950s, the Law Commission of India has suggested various reforms in the
machinery of justice, with a view to removing defects that engulf our justice
system. Till date, they have produced more than 256 reports (an average of just
over four per year[5].
In 1991, the economic policy of liberalization, globalization, and
privatization turned out to be a complete game changer for the Indian economy
and, by extension, for the justice system in the country. The new economic
policy opened the Indian market to international trade and investment and
largely initiated privatization. Unfortunately, even after the adoption of the
new economic policy, investors in the Indian market, particularly foreign
investors, faced problems due to the poor state of the country’s judicial
infrastructure. Our courts were overburdened with cases, lacked an adequate
number of judges, took a very long time to dispose of cases, and, most
importantly, judges lacked the expertise required to resolve a complex
commercial dispute. Thus, the Indian legal infrastructure needed reforms even
before 1991; however, the cycle of reforms that started post-1991 gave it an
additional trigger. About a decade later, in 2003, the Law Commission, in its
188th Report, noted, for the very first time, that the number of disputes
arising out of business and commerce had vastly increased post-1991. It stated
that these disputes, which were mostly ‘commercial’ in nature needed to be
specifically dealt by fast-track courts that are technologically equipped and
have professionally competent and trained judges who can hear these commercial
matters within designated timelines[6].
In fact, the Law Commission specifically noted that one of the biggest reasons
to create commercial courts was to prioritize these high-value litigations over
other pending matters. Having an effective commercial dispute resolution
framework would not only make the Indian litigation environment look good to
the world but also cater to the needs of domestic businesses that have been
caught up in litigation for years. If the commercial justice system is fast and
efficient, it would automatically create a welcoming business environment and
boost the country’s international economic relations, which essentially was one
of the most important objectives of the 1991 policy. Following the above line
of thought, in the same Report, the Law Commission put forward the Commercial
Division of High Courts Act, 2009[7]
(‘the 2009 Act’). The Act required State Governments to establish Commercial
Divisions in the High Courts of their respective states. This was the first
legislative attempt to identify and categorize ‘commercial disputes’ separately
and suggest that the country needed specialized courts dedicated to resolving
these disputes. Although the 2009 Act initially received opposition in the
Rajya Sabha, a lot of deliberations and discussions led to the final enactment
of CCA in 2015. The author has discussed the historical evolution of the same
in Part III. In 2003, the 188th Report of the Law Commission of India (“Law
Commission”) first recommended setting up fast-track courts in the High Courts.
In 2009, the Commercial Division of High Courts Act was approved by the Lok
Sabha (“2009 Act”). The Act was then examined by a Select Committee of the
Rajya Sabha (“Select Committee”), which presented its Report on July 29,
2010. A revised Commercial Division of
the High Court’s Act, 2010 was presented before the Rajya Sabha. Owing to
reservations expressed by several members of Parliament, the 2010 Act was
referred to the Law Commission for re-examination of its provisions. In
particular, the Law Commission was tasked with scrutinizing the scope and
definition of ‘commercial dispute. ’The Law Commission then engaged in several
discussions with expert committees and submitted a new report in 2015, namely,
the 253rd Report. The 253rd Report recommended setting up commercial courts,
Commercial Divisions, and Commercial Appellate Divisions in the High Courts[8].
As a result, the Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of High
Courts and Commercial Courts Act[9],
2015 (the “2015 Act”) was enacted by both Houses of Parliament on January 1,
2016, and made effective from October 23, 2015. In August 2018, the Act was
amended through the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial
Appellate Division of High Courts (Amendment) Act, 2018 (the “Amended Act”)
(the 2015 Act and the Amended Act together referred to as the “Act’’) to reduce
the pecuniary limits to jurisdiction for commercial disputes, thereby
increasing the workload of these courts. Unlike recent Indian legislations,
which were enacted by Parliament without much debate, the 2015 Act underwent
several modifications across 15 years before reaching its present iteration. In
this Section, we review the evolution of the commercial court’s policy across
three main policy documents: the 188th and 253rd Reports, the 2015 Act, and the
Amended Act. The Article focus on the changing objectives of the policy, the
jurisdiction of the court, the procedure to be followed, and the cost rule.
I.
Meaning of Commercial Court:
A wide
range of business transactions, contracts, and other commercial activity are
included in the broad definition of commercial disputes provided under the
Commercial Courts Act of 2015. The Act's Section 2(c) offers a thorough
description of commercial disputes, guaranteeing that all pertinent issues are
covered by the commercial courts. The definition of "commercial
dispute" provided under the Commercial Courts Act outlines the scope of
disputes falling within its purview. According to Section 2(1)(c)[10]
of the Act, a commercial dispute arises out of various types of transactions and
agreements commonly encountered in commercial dealings. These include:
1.
Ordinary
transactions of merchants, bankers, financiers, and traders, including
enforcement and interpretation of mercantile documents.
2.
Export or
import of merchandise or services.
3.
Issues
related to admiralty and maritime law.
4.
Transactions
involving aircraft, aircraft engines, aircraft equipment, and helicopters,
including sales, leasing, and financing.
5.
Carriage
of goods.
6.
Construction
and infrastructure contracts, including tenders.
7.
Agreements
relating to immovable property used exclusively in trade or commerce.
8.
Franchising
agreements.
9.
Distribution
and licensing agreements.
10.
Management
and consultancy agreements.
11.
Joint
venture agreements.
12.
Shareholders
agreements.
13.
Subscription
and investment agreements in the services industry, including outsourcing
services and financial services.
14.
Mercantile
agency and mercantile usage.
15.
Partnership
agreements.
16.
Technology
development agreements.
17.
Intellectual
property rights concerning trademarks, copyright, patents, designs, domain
names, geographical indications, and semiconductor integrated circuits.
18.
Agreements
for the sale of goods or provision of services.
19.
Exploitation
of oil and gas reserves or other natural resources, including electromagnetic spectrum.
20.
Insurance
and reinsurance contracts.
21.
Contracts
of agency related to any of the above.
22.
Any other
commercial disputes notified by the Central Government.
Additionally, the explanation provided in the
Act clarifies that a dispute does not cease to be a commercial dispute merely
because it involves actions such as the recovery of immovable property or
realization of monies secured by immovable property, or if one of the
contracting parties is a governmental body or a private entity performing public
functions.
This comprehensive definition encompasses a
wide range of commercial activities, ensuring that disputes arising from
various commercial transactions and agreements are adjudicated efficiently
under the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act. The case of Ambalal Sarabhai
Enterprises Ltd. v. K.S. Infraspace LLP & Anr.[11] pertains
to the interpretation of what constitutes a "commercial dispute"
under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. The Supreme Court, in its judgment dated
October 4, 2019, clarified that disputes arising from agreements related to
immovable property are categorized as commercial disputes only if the property
is actually and exclusively used in trade or commerce. The Supreme Court
observed that the plaint filed by the Appellant did not specify how the
property was being used for trade or commerce. It emphasized that the
jurisdiction of the Commercial Court can only be invoked if the immovable
property in question is actually used for trade or commerce.
II. The
Imperative for Referring Disputes to Commercial Courts:
The need
for specialized commercial courts arises from the complex nature of commercial
disputes, which often involve intricate legal and technical issues. To handle
such matters effectively, traditional judicial venues could require more
excellent knowledge and resources, which could cause delays and inefficiencies
in the settlement process. Commercial courts are more suited to handle these
issues because they have judges who are versed in business law and because they
have access to new technology. The Act requires the creation of commercial
sections in high courts and commercial courts at the district level to handle
exclusively commercial cases[12].
The Act tries to increase investor trust in the legal system and expedite dispute
settlement by granting authority to these specific courts. To guarantee that
these courts decide only critical corporate issues, the Act establishes a
defined threshold for assessing the commercial character of disputes. The Act
enables commercial courts to dispose of matters within specific timeframes to
expedite settlement. It guarantees parties obtain justice quickly, reducing the
financial burden of protracted litigation. Judges in business courts are
experts with experience in commercial law, ensuring that authorized parties
decide conflicts. The Act strongly emphasizes the use of technology to enhance
the efficiency and transparency of the adjudicatory process in court cases. It
includes electronic evidence, e-filing, and e-service. Since it passed, the way
commercial disputes are settled in India has evolved significantly due to the
Commercial Courts Act of 2015[13]. By
providing a dedicated venue for resolving such disputes, the Act has
considerably decreased the backlog of cases and enhanced the legal system's
effectiveness. Additionally, establishing commercial courts has boosted India's
standing as a top corporate destination by fostering trust among domestic and
foreign investors. Although the Commercial Courts Act of 2015 is a praiseworthy
endeavor to revise the legal structure around commercial disputes, several
obstacles still exist. These include complicated legal procedures, a lack of
qualified judges, and inadequate infrastructure. To ensure the Act is
implemented effectively, the government, courts, and other stakeholders must
work together to address these issues.
III.
Jurisdiction of Commercial Courts:
The key
provision that establishes the jurisdiction of commercial courts established
under the Commercial Courts Act 2015 is Section 6. It describes the range of
matters that are brought before these special courts for decision-making. The
jurisdiction of commercial courts is established under Section 6 and is
contingent upon the value of the subject matter in dispute. It states that
conflicts involving goods valued at a certain amount or more may be decided by
commercial courts. Under the Act, commercial courts and
commercial divisions in high courts can decide disputes with a value of at
least one crore rupees. The Act reduces this limit to an amount of at
least three lakh rupees or a higher value to be notified by the central
government[14].
It says that disputes involving business transactions of a certain
amount or more may be heard in commercial courts. This barrier, which varies
based on the economic significance of the dispute and the state of the market,
is set by the government. Although the value barrier is used in Section 6 to
determine the jurisdiction of commercial courts, some things are not included
in this definition. It means that some types of lawsuits, such as those
involving non-commercial conflicts or subjects specifically barred by other laws,
are not within the purview of commercial courts. In order to prevent
jurisdictional problems and promote the effective resolution of business
disputes, it guarantees that commercial courts concentrate solely on business
matters[15].
Commercial appellate courts at the district level are established under Section
7 of the Act. Appeals from orders and judgements rendered by commercial courts
operating within their districts are subject to the jurisdiction of these
appellate courts. The Act's Section 10 allows high courts to create business
divisions. Commercial disputes that surpass the designated value level fall
under the jurisdiction of these divisions. They guarantee the effective
handling of intricate business matters by high courts. According to section
2(1)(c) of the Commercial Courts Act, which defines commercial disputes, this
is the subject matter jurisdiction. The Commercial Courts Act of 2015 places a
strong emphasis on the necessity of expert adjudication in commercial disputes
in order to guarantee prompt and effective settlement. It stipulates that
judges having a background in business affairs will be appointed to head
commercial courts and divisions. The Act's Section 3(2) provides definitions
for judge appointments. The 2015 Commercial Courts Act creates an appeal
process to examine rulings made by divisions and courts of commerce. It
guarantees that parties may file complaints with higher authorities if they are
unfulfilled with the way their cases were resolved. The Appeal is defined under
Section 13 of the Act.
IV.
Judicial Interpretation
1. Authority of the Commercial Division of the
High Courts. Outlined in case, Daimler Financial Services India Pvt. Limited
vs. Vikash Kumar and Ors.
A thorough
examination of the Commercial Court's jurisdiction may be found in the current
instance; the petitioner is a non-banking financial institution that gave the
respondents a loan, but they later stopped making payments. The case was sent
to a single arbitrator for resolution by the contract terms. However, the
petitioner filed a case with the Dhanbad Commercial Court after getting an
inadequate ruling. Under the direction of its judicial officer, the court
denied the petition on the grounds of jurisdictional limitations, as specified
by the threshold of 1 crore rupees, without any announcement from the state
government about changes to this cap for its adjudication. Later, the
petitioner formally petitioned the High Court of Jharkhand in Ranchi, citing
Article 227 of the Indian Constitution. According to this constitutional
clause, the High Court has supervisory responsibility over all courts and
tribunals under its geographical jurisdiction, which gives it a legal means of
reviewing and supervising judgments made by lesser courts.
Even
though TDM Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. is under foreign control, the Supreme Court
ruled in the matter of TDM
Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. UE Development India Pvt. Ltd[16].
("TDM Infrastructure") that "a company formed in India can only
be considered Indian for the Act." The Supreme Court categorized
arbitration involving Indian incorporated companies under foreign control as
domestic arbitration, despite the Act acknowledging that arbitration involving
corporations with management and control outside India is considered an
International Commercial Arbitration (ICA). A notable modification was made to
Section 2(1)(f)(iii) by the 2015 Amendment Act, which eliminated the word
"a firm" and limited the definition to include just a group of people
or an organization. Because of this, the dominant understanding requires that
the position of Indian-incorporated companies, central management, and control
have no bearing on their eligibility for arbitration. This position is
demonstrated by a recent court decision in which the Supreme Court decided a
case involving overseas corporations and an Indian company that was the lead
partner in a consortium with its headquarters in Mumbai. The court established
India as the consortium's core administrative and control hub by upholding the
Indian firm's right to choose the group's chairman.
2. Encompasses an arbitration clause, Outlined in case, M/s NN Global Mercantile Pvt Ltd vs. M/s Indo
Unique Flame Ltd & Others[17]
The Supreme Court decided that an
agreement that includes an arbitration clause is subject to stamp duty
regulations. However, according to Section 2(h) of the Contract Act, it is only
legally enforceable if the document is stamped. Furthermore, it isn't
enforceable under Contract Act Section 2(g). Therefore, compliance with stamp
duty laws is essential to guaranteeing the legality of contracts.
3.
Any appeals to an arbitral outlined case, Ircon International Limited vs. Afcons
Infrastructure Limited. [18]
It was emphasized that for an appeal
to be granted under Section 34 of the Act, the requirements listed in the Act
must be met. The Act was passed to reduce court involvement and foster quick
and effective arbitration of disputes. An award can only be declared void under
specific legal circumstances. The court reiterated that its participation in challenges
under Section 34 is limited based on past cases. The body needs the authority
to hear appeals or to revaluate the case's facts and supporting documentation.
The court found that there are
restrictions on how much an arbitral
judgment under Section 34 can be involved until it is evident that the
arbitrator, who has complete authority to It was emphasized that for an appeal
to be granted under Section 34 of the Act, the requirements listed in the Act,
must be met. When assessing the facts, circumstances, evidence, and documents
provided to them, the Act, which had control over the evidence, erred. The
form's text is positioned at both the top and bottom.
4.
The revaluation of evidence, outlined
in case, Ssangyong Engg. &
Construction Co. Ltd. vs. NHAI[19]
The Supreme Court made it clear that
in a Section 34 petition, the patent illegality argument cannot support the
revaluation of evidence—which is permitted by the court. The court further
noted that relatively few grounds are available to challenge a decision under
Section 34.
5.
Examine the notion of arbitrability
in the case of Booz Allen and Hamilton
Inc. v. SBI Home Finance Ltd[20].
The
Supreme Court thoroughly analyzed the concept of arbitrability. The study
concluded that the term "arbitrability" has several meanings
depending on the situation:
(a) conflicts
that can be settled by arbitration,
(b) disputes
that are covered by the arbitration agreement and
(c) Conflicts
that the parties have expressly agreed to be arbitrated.
Every
dispute that a civil court can resolve may be resolved through arbitration.
Certain disputes may likely be inherently prohibited from being settled by a
non-governmental organization. Arbitrable disagreements consist of: Among the
types of differences that are frequently seen in the context of judicial
processes are the following:
•
Criminal case cases;
•
Divorce cases including separation, divorce, rights
to the marriage, or child custody;
•
Guardianship cases arrangements • Concerns about
insolvency and the winding-up procedure
•
Will-related legal issues, including succession
certificates, letters of administration, and grants of probate
•
Tenancy or eviction disputes, especially those
governed by specific regulations that give renters legal remedies against
eviction.
The only
courts with the power to decide these cases or issue eviction are the ones that
resolve these conflicts. These many classifications highlight the complexity of
legal disputes in the legal system.
Conclusion
The
Commercial Courts Act of 2015, which established commercial courts, is a
significant step forward in India's continuous efforts to improve its business
climate and judicial system. These niche courts are essential to the prompt
resolution of business conflicts, economic expansion, confidence-building of
investors, and smooth operation of the legal system. To fully achieve the Act's
promise of fostering an appropriate business climate, obstacles still need to
be overcome, even though it has established a solid framework for settling
commercial disputes. Creating a specialized venue for settling business
disputes is one of the main goals of the Commercial Courts Act of 2015[21].
The Act seeks to expedite the adjudication procedure and guarantee that
disagreements settle quickly, swiftly, and effectively by establishing expert
divisions and courts with authority over business disputes[22].
These specialist courts possess the know-how required to apply pertinent
business rules and principles while comprehending the intricacies of business
operations. The Act also establishes accelerated processes and deadlines for
resolving business disputes. It is crucial because, in the business world, time
is of the essence, and delays in resolving disputes may significantly impact
investors and companies. The Act gives investors, both local and foreign,
confidence by enhancing the legitimacy of the judicial system and offering fast
and effective settlement methods[23].
In addition, the Commercial Courts Act of 2015 guarantees impartiality and
openness in resolving controversies. The Act has specific procedural
procedures. The rights of any party and encourage fair competition in business
challenges. The Act also creates an appeal process to examine commercial court
rulings, improve accountability, and ensure justice. To enhance the efficiency
of commercial courts, several issues still need to be resolved, even with the
tremendous advancements brought about by the Commercial Courts Act of 2015. A
problem that may compromise the efficacy of these specialized forums is the
backlog of cases in commercial courts. To reduce this backlog and guarantee
prompt conflict resolution, initiatives must be undertaken to improve the
effectiveness of court procedures, expand judicial capacity, and support
alternative dispute settlement methods.
Additionally, it's imperative to update
continuously and stay up with changing business practices and the increasing
complexity of commercial transactions; the legal framework regulating
commercial courts must be refined. To close loopholes, expedite processes, and
improve the efficiency of Commercial courts in settling disputes, periodic
revisions and overhauls to the Commercial Courts Act of 2015 are needed.
Recommendation
and suggestion
A vital
aspect of India's legal framework, the closure of commercial disputes under the
Commercial Courts Act 2015 significantly impacts the nation's economy, investor
confidence, and business conditions generally. While creating excellent
business courts is a positive step towards quick settlement, more money should
be allocated to judicial infrastructure and capacity building. Even with the
establishment of Commercial courts, backlogs in cases and delays in conflict
resolution persist. Sufficient resources must be allotted to guarantee the
seamless operation of commercial courts. This includes the selection of
competent juries and support personnel, as well as the use of technological
advancements for maximizing court processes and case administration[24].
Alternate conflict resolution procedures must be prioritized in addition to
customary litigation, such as arbitration and mediation[25].
By guaranteeing parties increased flexibility, secrecy, and cost-effectiveness
in conflict settlement, these tools lighten the legal system load and boost the
resolution process[26].
Awareness
campaigns and training workshops should be held to encourage companies and
legal practitioners to use alternative conflict settlement procedures. To
address new issues and weaknesses in the legal system, the Commercial Courts
Act of 2015 has to be reviewed and updated regularly. Procedures should be
streamlined, judgments should be more easily enforced, and best practices from
overseas should be included. It is advisable to put together stakeholder
discussions to get suggestions and views for enhancing the efficiency of business
dispute resolution procedures. There needs to be a coordinated pursuit. To
improve the adjudication process's accountability and honesty[27].
A fair and unbiased adjudication process can be ensured by increasing openness,
such as digitizing court documents, implementing online case monitoring
systems, and granting public access to judicial rulings. To uphold
accountability and encourage perpetual growth, procedures for keeping tabs on
the functioning of commercial courts and assessing the success of judicial
reforms should also be implemented[28].
Initiatives aimed at increasing capacity should also be implemented to improve
judges' and other legal professionals' specific knowledge and proficiency in
business law and dispute resolution. Workshops, seminars, and exchange
agreements with foreign organizations can all aid in developing the abilities
needed to resolve business disagreements successfully.
[1] II semester, Masters in Corporate
and Commercial Laws, School of Law, Christ (Deemed to be university)
[2] Professor, School of Law, Christ
(Deemed to be university)
[3] Commercial Courts Act, 2015, s. 1.
[4] A. Kumar, 'Understanding the Commercial Courts Act, 2015: An
Overview' (2019) 8(3) Indian Journal of Legal Studies 210.
[5] Law Commission of India, 'Reports' (Government of India,
2022) https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/ [accessed 11 March 2024].
[6] Law Commission of India, 'Report
No. 188: Fast Track Courts for Commercial Disputes' (Government of India, 2003) https://lawcommissionofindia.nic.in/reports/188rpt.htm [accessed 11 March 2024].
[7] The
Commercial Division of High Courts Bill, 2009.
https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-commercial-division-of-high-courts-bill-2009
[8] The
Commercial Division of High Courts Bill, 2009.
https://prsindia.org/billtrack/the-commercial-division-of-high-courts-bill-2009
[9] Necessity
of Pre-Suit Mediation in Commercial Disputes: An Analysis of Section 12A of the
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – SURANA & SURANA. https://suranaandsurana.com/2022/12/13/necessity-of-pre-suit-mediation-in-commercial-disputes-an-analysis-of-section-12a-of-the-commercial-courts-act-2015/
[10]https://www.indiacode.nic.in/showdata?actid=AC_CEN_3_46_00008_201604_1517807328347§ionId=9671§ionno=2&orderno=2
[11] Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprises Ltd. v. K.S. Infraspace LLP
& Anr., Civil Appeal No. 10084 of 2018, Supreme Court of India, judgment
dated October 4, 2019. Available at: [https://www.vaishlaw.com/supreme-court-definition-of-commercial-disputes-under-the-commercial-courts-act-2015-to-include-immovable-property-actually-used-and-not-likely-to-be-used/]
[13]
https://www.indiacode.nic.in/bitstream/123456789/2156/1/a2016-04.pdf
[14]
https://prsindia.org/billtrack/prs-products/prs-bill-summary-3066
[15]https://www.advocatekhoj.com/library/bareacts/commercialcourts/index.php?Title=Commercial%20Courts%20Act,%202015
[16]
TDM Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. UE Development India Pvt. Ltd., (2008) 14 SCC
271.
[17] M/s NN Global Mercantile Pvt
Ltd v. M/s Indo Unique Flame Ltd & Others, 2023 SCC Online SC 495.
[18] Ircon International Limited v. Afcons
Infrastructure Limited, 2023 SCC Online Del 2350.
[19]
Ssangyong Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd. v. National Highways
Authority of India (NHAI), civil appeal no. 4779 of 2019, available at
https://www.sci.gov.in/supremecourt/2017/19190/19190_2017_Judgement_08-May-2019.pdf.
[20] Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc. v.
SBI Home Finance Ltd., (2011) 5 SCC 532.
[21] S. Gupta, 'Impact of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 on India's
Business Environment' (2019) 7(4) Indian Journal of Business Law 289.
[22] R. Sharma, 'Ensuring Impartiality and Transparency: A
Critical Analysis of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015' (2018) 6(3) Indian
Journal of Business Law 201.
[23] J. Patel, 'The Impact of Commercial Courts Act, 2015 on
Investor Confidence' (2020) 15(2) International Journal of Legal Studies 87.
[24] R. Sharma, 'Modernizing Judicial Infrastructure in India:
Leveraging Technological Advancements' (2020) 14(3) Journal of Legal Reforms
182.
[25] M. Singh, 'The Role of Alternative Dispute Resolution in
Easing Judicial Backlogs in India' (2018) 5(2) Indian Journal of Business Law
109.
[27] R. Gupta, 'Enhancing Accountability and Transparency in
India's Adjudication Process' (2020) 9(2) Indian Journal of Legal Studies 123.
[28] ] S. Sharma, 'Measuring Success: Assessing the Impact of
Judicial Reforms in India' (2019) 7(3) Indian Journal of Business Law 189.
Article Information
ADJUDICATION OF COMMERCIAL DISPUTE IN INDIA UNDER COMMERCIAL COURT ACT,2015
Authors: AMBIKA KUNWAR SISODIYA, DR GOPI RANGANATH V
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/03/16
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.