Efficacy Of Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanisms In Resolving Civil Cases

Rishit, NLU Jodhpur

ABSTRACT

The term ‘Alternative Dispute Resolution’ (ADR) includes the various methods for resolving disputes without taking the resort of litigation. ADR systems aim to offer cost-effective, straightforward, swift, and accessible avenues for justice. The primary goal is to prevent the proliferation of lawsuits, save valuable time and money, and enable parties to reach a lawful, written, and voluntary settlement. The fundamental principle is that any matter that can be settled through a lawsuit can also be resolved through compromise. ADR is a well-established mechanism to resolve conflicts outside the traditional court system. It offers flexible and costeffective options for parties seeking resolution.

The Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, an important piece of legislation, provides the legal framework for arbitration proceedings in India. It is designed to promote and facilitate alternative dispute resolution methods, offering a more efficient and informal route to resolving disputes compared to traditional court litigation.

The Civil Procedure Code (CPC) of India is a comprehensive legal code that regulates civil proceedings in Indian courts. Together, these two legal instruments contribute to the functioning of the Indian judicial system, offering both litigation and arbitration as viable options for resolving disputes.

In 1999, the introduction of Section 89 in the legal framework allowed courts to proactively refer disputes to ADR methods if it appears that a mutual settlement may be achieved. Over time, this provision has been clarified and refined through various legal judgments outlining a structured procedure for implementing ADR under Section 89.

This paper provides an overview of the procedure outlined in the Civil Procedure Code, along with the various ADR methods, with a specific focus on the Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited (2010). It briefly delves into the historical background of Section 89, the recommendations made by different law commissions, the interplay of this section with other Indian statutes, and its current status. Moreover, it delineates the types of cases suitable for ADR processes and those unsuitable for such procedures.

Subsequently, the paper scrutinizes the conditions, advantages, and limitations of ADR. It concludes by presenting recommendations to address issues related to Alternative Dispute Resolution.