. For this purpose, we plan to build input parameters based on sample arbitration clauses.

To illustrate: S
No. INPUT OUTPUT REASON 1. No arbitration agreement in contract annexed to application
Appointment of arbitrator not possible No arbitration clause in existence 2. Arbitration agreement in
contract not signed Appointment of arbitrator not possible Invalid consent for Arbitration. 3. Any
dispute, controversy, or claim relating to this agreement, either Party may, but is not required to submit
the Dispute to binding arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The
Parties Submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Courts in Mumbai, India Appointment of arbitrator not
possible Clause does not create any binding and mandatory arbitration agreement between the parties,
which is against the mandate of Section 7 of the Arbitration Act. 4. Disputes in relation to termination of
the agreement shall be submitted to binding arbitration in accordance with the Arbitration and
Conciliation Act, 1996n accordance with the said Rules. Appointment of arbitrator possible Appears to
be a valid arbitration agreement Table 1 – Examples of Input-Output Parameters to determine existence
of arbitration agreement 3. We note that the Supreme Court of India (See: Vidya Drolia v. Durga Trading
Corporation (2021) 2 SCC 1; BSNL v Nortel (2021) 5 SCC 738), has more recently held that the Court must
also undertake a primary first review to weed out “manifestly ex facie non-existent and invalid
arbitration agreements, or non-arbitrable disputes”. We posit that the AI tool can also assist the judge in
conducting this ‘primary first review’. This would be based on a summary of the pleadings with respect
to pending applications under Section 11 of the Arbitration Act along with their reply/defences. To
illustrate S NO KEY WORDS OUTPUT REASON 1. Application - Agreement for Rent, Lease, sub-lease,
leave and license, etc. Appointment of arbitrator not possible Subject matter of agreement not
arbitrable 2. Reply to application – Claim time barred due to agreement or Limitation Act, 1963 To be
adjudicated on its own merits Issue of time barred claim/ limitation involved. Table 2 – Examples of
Input-Output Parameters to weed out non-arbitrable disputes 3. You may use a flowchart or diagram to
explain this product Flow chart: Process to determine existence of arbitration agreement and process to
classify disputes that require further judicial determination 4. Name the AI Blocks you are using for this
product: IndicNLP 5. Name the training data sets required for your product We won’t be using any of the
provided datasets from the resource kit. We would be working with the following:- a. Sample arbitration
clauses b. Key words for clustering applications that require judicial determination c. Section 11
Applications as filed in court d. Reply/Defence to Section 11 Applications e. Judgments passed in Section
11 Applications 6. Who is the target audience (market) for your product The product is primarily for the
judiciary at various levels to speed-up and assist in its decision making. The product can also be a
prediction tool for litigants for estimating the chances of acceptance of their specified cases, based on
the incorporated data sets and integrated open-source AI blocks so that citizens/litigants can take an
informed decision. The illustrative product for Arbitration Law, is targeted to assist High Court /
Supreme Court judges along with litigants involved in commercial disputes. The product aims to
generate automated reports as to the probable fate of the Section 11 applications, before they are
taken up for hearing. The product assumes greater significance, particularly in the backdrop of the
recent order dated 19 May 2022 by the Supreme Court, in the case of M/s Shree Vishnu Constructions v.
The Engineer in Chief, Military Engineering Service & Ors. (Unreported) wherein, the Supreme Court
inter alia directed Chief Justices of High Courts to: “ensure that all pending applications under Sections
11(5) and 11(6) of the Arbitration Act and/or any other applications either for substitution of arbitrator
and/or change of arbitrator, which are pending for more than one year from the date of filing, must be
decided within six months from today. The Registrar General(s) of the respective High Courts are
directed to submit the compliance report on completion of six months from today. All endeavour shall
be made by the respective High Courts to decide and dispose of the applications under Sections 11(5)
and 11(6) of the Arbitration Act and/or any other like application at the earliest and preferably within a
period of six months from the date of filing of the applications.” 7. Upload a 2 minute voice recording
explaining your product and its benefits 8. What are the challenges your team expects to face during the
Make-a-thon? - Section 11 Applications not publicly accessible: We can test the efficacy of the AI model
based on an actual review of arbitration agreements as annexed to Section 11 Applications as filed
before the High Court / Supreme Court. These applications are however not accessible to the public. Till
such time we gain access to such applications, we propose using the AI Model to review executed
contracts that may / may not contain arbitration agreements. - Dataset required for building the project
is not readily available.