CHAPTER 01

INTRODUCTION

Mahatma Gandhi once said: “I had learnt the true practice of law. I had learnt to
find out the better side of human nature, and to enter men's hearts. I realized that
the true function of a lawyer was to unite parties... The lesson was so indelibly
burnt into me that a large part of my time during the twenty years of my practice
as a lawyer was occupied in bringing about private compromise of hundreds of
cases. I lost nothing thereby not even money; certainly not my soul.”

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) is also known as external dispute

resolution. It is a term ordinarily used to refer to formal dispute resolution
processes in which the disputing parties meet with a professional "third party"
who assist them to resolve their dispute by settlement, cooperative, negotiation,
mediation, arbitration, counseling, and cancellation etc. It is to be noted that
most common format of ADR are mediation and arbitration. The concept of
"ADR" is some time more dated by the Courts, which require that disputants try
radiation before they taken their case to the Court of law.

In other words the expression "Alternative Dispute Resolution" or ADR is

usually used to describe a wide variety of dispute resolution system which is
indeed more economical and a time saving mechanism. The term 'ADR can be
referred to everything from felicitated settlement of dispute in which disputing
parties are employed to negotiate directly, but not in very strict condition.
'ADR' is ordinarily used as an acronym for settlement/arbitration/
negotiation/mediation of a dispute, which is defined as a process or procedure
other than adjudication by a presiding judge in a Court of Law. In ADR, a
neutral third party takes part to help rather to assist in the resolution of issues in
controversy.

It is against this backdrop, that this research paper intends to discuss the various
ADR mechanisms, the provisions present in India and the World over, and its
peculiarity, implementation and problems in the Indian context. The various
remedies to the situation have also been discussed.
 CHAPTER 02
MEANING, OBJECTIVES, HISTORICAL BACKGROUND,
ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES OF ADR
Meaning
Alternative Dispute Resolution which is commonly known by its standard short
form 'ADR' is an alternative to the normal judicial system. It is usually an
umbrella term for methods, other than judicial determination, in which an
impartial person (an ADR practitioner) helps those in a dispute to resolve the
issues between them. At the outset, we must acknowledge that ADR covers all
forms of dispute resolution other than court adjudication. ADR is any method of
resolving disputes without litigation. But at the same time, it should be
remembered that ADR is not appropriate for every dispute and it is not the
solution to all disputes or conflicts.

Objectives
 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- avoids judicial proceedings and trials.

Historical Background
The process of arbitration is not alien to India. It always had been practiced
since time immemorial. In India, people believed in resolving disputes within
the four walls because this was somewhere considered as an element to protect
their dignity and personality in the society. Hence, the mechanism gained
significance in India since Ancient times.

a. Ancient India
In ancient India when there was Kulas, people used to live in joint families with
their clans and when there was caste system prevalent in the society. The
disputes among the kulas were resolved by the head of the family, clan or Kula.
Likewise, when there was common trade, corporations or Shrenis among the
people, they used to appoint person to resolve the disputes within the Shrenis.

b. Pre Independence: British rule

During the British rule in India, much legislation was introduced and a drastic
change came in the administration of India. In 1772, the courts were empowered
to refer disputes to arbitration either at the request of the parties or by its own
discretion. Then after a decade, in 1859 The Code of Civil Procedure was
enacted, sections 312 to 327 of the act mentioned arbitration but in 1882 the
sections relating to arbitration was repealed. In 1899 The Indian Arbitration Act,
1899 was enacted to give effect to alternate dispute mechanism in India. The act
was based on the English legislation. Then in 1908, CPC was again amended
and section 89 with second schedule gave wide powers to the courts to refer the
disputes to ADR mechanism. Then, The Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 and
section 89 read with second schedule of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 were
two effective legislation to deal with arbitration. Thereafter, in 1937 Geneva
Convention was signed and adopted by India and a parallel legislation was
introduced in the form of The Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act,
1937. In 1940, The Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 and section 89 with second
schedule of CPC was repealed and replaced by The Arbitration Act, 1940. In
local levels Panchayats were very effective in resolving the disputes in villages
in India.

c. Post Independence
Bodies such as the panchayat, a group of elders and influential persons in a
village deciding the dispute between villagers are very common even today. The
panchayat has, in the recent past, also been involved in caste disputes. In 1982
settlement of disputes out of courts started through Lok Adalats. The first Lok
Adalat was held on March 14, 1982 at Junagarh in Gujarat and now it has been
extended throughout the country. Initially, Lok Adalats functioned as a
voluntary and conciliatory agency without any statutory backing for its
decisions. By the enactment of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, which
came into force from November 9, 1995, the institution of Lok Adalats received
statutory status. To keep pace with the globalization of commerce the old
Arbitration Act of 1940 is replaced by the new Arbitration and Conciliation Act,
1996. Settlement of matters concerning the family has been provided under
Order XXXIIA of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by amendment in 1976.
Provisions for making efforts for reconciliation under Sections 23 (2) and 23 (3)
of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 as also under Section 34 (3) of the Special
Marriage Act, 1954 are made. Family Courts Act was enacted in 1984. Under
Family Courts Act, 1984 it is the duty of family court to make efforts for
settlement between the parties. Introduction of section 89 and Order X Rule 1A,
1B and 1C by way of an Amendment in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 is a
radical advancement made by the Indian Legislature in embracing the system of
"Court Referred Alternative Disputes Resolution".

Advantages of ADR
The method of ADR contains typical advantages over formal litigation.
These are as under-

1. ADR supports Courts reforms

ADR system can support Court's reforms in several ways. Even ADR can be
used by the judiciary to test and demonstrate new procedure that might later be
extended or integrated with existing Court procedures. In fact ADR is an option
within the judicial system; it can be used as a mechanism to reduce work load of
the Courts and can be managed and practiced as an effective tool, specifically
the field which is not well served by the Courts. In some countries ADR is
regarded as dispute clearing house. Notably, the main problem with the Courts
are complex and inappropriate procedures, rather than institutional corruption
and malpractice. Whereas ADR program can provide streamlined procedures to
speed-up disposal of cases pending since decades. ADR procedure may serve as
models that can later be incorporated in formal Court procedures. ADR can
work as a catalyst for more widely Court reform.

2. ADR Supplements Court

Where in the present scenario judicial system has so many institutional
shortcomings and failure, on account of inadequate infrastructure, corruption
and practice etc. and there is no hope in near future regarding Courts reform,
ADR system may be the most suitable method to provide an alternative forum
to redress grievances. Even complex or technical disputes can be dealt more
appropriately rather effectively hiring specialized private ADR firms.

3. Increased satisfaction of Disputants

Though, increased satisfaction of disputants is one of the merits of ADRS
objectives, but study revealed that the cost, access and delay focused in
settlement of disputes, these are also factors to disputants. ADR program can
have positive influence on the disputant's satisfaction, specifically in respect of
personal/business relationship as the ADR system is so responsive and needed
the most to curtail "marathon" dates of hearing in the Courts. When ADR
system is assessed in respect of user's satisfaction, they prefer this informal
method for settlement of their disputes, For example-In Sri-Lanka, satisfaction
with the Mediation Board system is quite high. In addition to the accessibility of
the system and the low cost disputants indicate that the way they are treated the
disputants' control of the process and the community based nature of ADR
system, are all factors responsible to achieve a high degree of satisfaction to
disputants. Most importantly, the degree of satisfaction is also reflected in the
settlement and compliance rates.

4. Justice for Disadvantaged Group

Mainly, due to poverty certain groups of society are deprived of justice.
Because, the litigation in Courts are complicated, expensive and time
consuming. The disadvantaged groups being an illiterate find more difficulties
to litigation. However, ADR system is the best option for them; many poor’s are
denied access to the justice delivery system, because they cannot afford to pay
the lawyer's fees and Court's fees necessary to enter to formal legal system
dispute resolution for many groups in the developing countries.

5. Reduce delay in resolution of disputes

Formal legal system causes delay in resolution of disputants. This phenomenon
can be witnessed throughout the world and such delay affects a number of
development objectives. It has been experienced that in some cases, delays are
so extreme that it effectively deny justice. In this context this legal maximum is
relevant that "Delay defeats justice'. There are 'incidents, when disadvantaged
group find themselves at receiving end as they are not able to grease the wheel
of the formal legal system. However, in other cases, delays in the resolution of
commercial disputes obstruct the economic development and further undermine
the efficiency of the economy extensively.

6. Reduce the cost of Resolving Disputes

Undoubtedly, the Court filing costs are high in terms of money and time. The
High cost in the Courts are driven by formal procedures or for want of legal
representation by lawyers. Delay in Court's resolution imposes high costs on the
parties. There are ADR programmes which are designed to meet with the object
of reducing cost of resolving disputes resolution systems the question, whether
ADR system satisfies the said object, is still the subject matter for discussion
even in U.S.A.. Some of the ADR system followed and adopted in developing
countries show the cost reduction is a core object for ADR system, however, a
well designed ADR system can adequately and effectively achieve this object.

7. Appropriate Solution to the Dispute

People from any section of society especially business community would prefer
settling a lawsuit before it goes to trial in a court. The expenses of a lawsuit
almost always significantly prevail over the benefits. Consequently, choosing
ADR - mediation and arbitration-makes sense in about 99% of the cases.
Moreover, simply providing rights in Constitution or other laws will not resolve
the problem unless there is proper machinery for the implementation for
effective enforcement of rights. The present judicial system not only in India
but in other parts of the worlds too is facing the problem of delivering justice
because of the heavy arrears of cases and heavy inflow of cases. ADR methods
offer "best solution" to disputes involving legal and emotional issues like in
matrimonial cases or family business. ADR has wide range of remedies too
which ensure an especially tailored method as per the nature and requirement of
the dispute and in that scenario it becomes ADR-Appropriate Dispute
Resolution, for example arbitration has become the first option in commercial
disputes across the world.

8. Involvement of Skilled Neutral

ADR methods are not only based on cooperativeness but also include
supervision of skilled third party neutral and therefore ADR methods produce
"minimum friction" between parties by upholding the principles of equity,
justice and good conscience as a consequence of which ADR has achieved
national and international fame and is on the verge of becoming a separate
discipline which is enjoying ongoing popularity in contrast to litigation that too
with non-adversial objectives.

9. Promotes Participative Justice

ADR methods promote justice as the procedures offer "faster reliefs" especially
in claim cases through Lok Adalats. ADR mechanisms are "relatively
inexpensive" in comparison with the ordinary legal process. It helps the courts
in lessening the workload of cases and cures the delay of justice. ADR has not
only maximum participation of parties but also informal and flexible nature,
hence promotes "participative justice" which has problem solving attitude and
willingness to compromise.

10. Other Advantages

The other advantages of ADR system are summed up:
i. Advocates of ADR believe that it is superior to a formal litigation in
Courts.
ii. ADR is generally faster and less expensive.
iii. ADR is based on direct participation by the disputing parties.
iv. ADR processes are designed and defined by the disputants with the
help of third party.
v. ADR delivers increased people's satisfaction.
vi. Most ADR mechanism based on an integrative approach.
vii. ADR process is less competitive.
viii. ADR tends to generate less ill will between the parties.
ix. ADR processes are more cooperative.
x. Outcome of ADR is easy to comply with, because it is voluntary
mode.
xi. ADR encourages compromise which is good for maintaining-
harmonious relationship between the parties.

Disadvantages of ADR
It is true that ADR system plays an important role in settlement of dispute by
means of counseling, collective bargaining, cancellation, negotiation, mediation
and arbitration, but in certain cases like human rights, criminal offence and
public legal rights, perhaps even ADR system is not right option in serving
some objects concerned to rule of Law. There are limitations/disadvantages of
the ADR system too, which are as under-

1. No precedent
ADR system is not tools of law, as it seeks to resolve individual dispute on case
by case basis and resolution of different cases resolved with different outcome,
because ADR system takes in to consideration the preferences of the parties and
local norms, which may not be appropriate in eyes of law in strict sense.
Notably ADR outcomes are private which hardly published publically. ADR
system, as no legal normative standard is followed and this not capable to
resolve power imbalances between/among disputants. There is no established
process for dispute resolution.

2. Ineffective to correct systematic Injustice.

As stated earlier, ADR system resolution shows adoption of local norms which
may include discrimination or violence of human rights against certain
groups/classes of the society. ADR system may promote discrimination, causing
injustice to that particular groups/classes For example-In India, establishment of
the Lok-Adalats settled a number of cases efficiently and economically in the
mid 1980's before the Lok-Adalat (people's Court) was taken over by the
judiciary (Government). In this context experience reveals that the Indian
women did not prefer the Lok-Adalat system specifically when dispute is a
family or matrimonial dispute, because such disputes are to be settled rather
based on local norms, which were usually discriminatory specifically towards
women and the member of lower casts were dealt with discriminatory pre-
occupation of mind.

3. Extreme power imbalance between parties

Ordinarily, the settlements through ADR system do not reflect total fairness and
absolute acceptance by the all participants. On account of discrimination in the
society, the weaker parties are not likely to be protected. A more
powerful/wealthy party may apply pressure upon weaker party to realize unfair
result, which may appear to be fair but in fact result from pressure and coercions
for the aforesaid reason ADR system may not work well if one of the parties is
the Government, For example-In Bangladesh, women who has submitted cases
of matrimonial dispute to mediation, they have found that village mediations
machinery which includes women mediator provides better result than the Court
machinery which is even more partial against women. It is well said that ADR
system cannot substitute for stronger formal protection of weaker groups in the
society.

4. Settlements are not deterrent

It is true that the result of ADR system do not have any educational, exemplary,
punitive or deterrent effect on the society. There is no public sanction or
punishment in this system. No doubt under ADR system societal and individual
interest may not be served well but the same can be served efficiently and
effectively by the Court sanctioned punishment inform of all imprisonment or
fine or both. Thus it can be said that the ADR system/resolution does not
propose to give impact on population at large.

5. Settlements are not deterrent

It is true that the result of ADR system do not have any educational, exemplary,
punitive or deterrent effect on the society. There is no public sanction or
punishment in this system. No doubt under ADR system societal and individual
interest may not be served well but the same can be served efficiently and
effectively by the Court sanctioned punishment inform of all imprisonment or
fine or both. Thus it can be said that the ADR system/resolution does not
propose to give impact on population at large.

6. Undermining Judicial Reforms Efforts

It is true that popularity and success of the ADR system may side line the
programmer for judicial reforms. Notably, ADR system is not designed to
substitute for legal reform. For example in Ukraine-the USAID million
considers the mediation programmer to be very in expensive compared with
other rule of law programmer. ADR programmer likely to reduced the burden of
the public-exchequer and in view of effectively the efforts of judicial reforms.

7. Time Consuming
ADR methods like Arbitration and Conciliation operate with the "convenience
and consent" of parties and neutral third party; hence it consumes lot of time.
Although a time period has been fixed in the amendment of 2015 to the
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 but still looking at the objective of ADR
methods, they have become more time consuming.
 8. Expensive Methods

ADR methods like arbitration, conciliation, mediation etc. require the

supervision or involvement of skilled neutral third parties for which parties
often approach to some institution or experts and the costs and fees of the
experts and procedure gradually have increased over the years and nowadays
prominent ADR experts charge very high fees and ask for luxurious places to
hold meetings for the resolution of disputes along with other expenditures on
travel and associates.

9. Time and Money Wasted

ADR methods lead to excellent results if they attain the ultimate goal that is
"Settlement Agreement" or "Award' etc. but if they fail to achieve the final
objective and the parties resort to normal court system due to incompatibility,
the whole ADR System looks like a mockery and moreover till that time, parties
have wasted lots of money and time on ADR procedures.

10. Other Disadvantages

Although ADR methods have much more advantages as compared to
disadvantages but there are other major disadvantages like:

i. ADR methods promote compromise which is not suitable in serious

matters.
ii. ADR methods are not suitable for grave criminal offences, constitutional
matters, human rights and public legal rights etc."
iii. ADR methods are also not appropriate for Multi-party cases.
iv. Most of the retired judges have found a way to be engaged as ADR
experts and hence the approach of ADR procedures operates with the
same legal complexities.
v. ADR methods stand or fall on the factor of consent.
vi. ADR is not a solution for every dispute.
vii. Some of the ADR methods are new to Indians and hence the parties
remain unfamiliar with the procedure and have to depend on the whim
and caprice of the skilled neutral third party.
 CHAPTER 03
A. ADR Mechanism in India

The Law Commission of India, in its 14th report, suggested devising of ways
and means to make sure that justice should be uncomplicated, swift, easy on the
pocket, effectual and substantial. In its 77th report, Law Commission of India
observed that the Indian society is, predominantly an agrarian society and is not
refined enough to comprehend the technical and awkward procedures pursued
by the Courts. The three major laws that reflect sensitivity of Indian government
towards ADR promotion are Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and Legal
Services Authority Act, 1987 accompanied by Section 89 as well as Order 10
Rule 1-A to 1-C of Civil Procedure Code along with scattered provisions among
various other laws like Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Section 23(2) of the
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 and Section 9 of the Family Courts Act, 1984. We
can also find such provisions in Section 80, Order XXIII, Rule 3, Order XXVII,
Rule 5-B, Order XXXII-A & Order XXXVI of the Code of Civil Procedure,
1908.
Section 89 of Civil Procedure Code, provides the five different methods of
ADR which can be listed as follows:
a. Arbitration
b. Conciliation
c. Mediation
d. Judicial Settlement and
e. Lok Adalat
It is Necessary because of the Heavy Caseload in the Courts. There has
been a dramatic increase in the number of cases filed in Indian courts in
recent years, leading to pendency and delays and underscoring the need for
alternate dispute resolution techniques. In light of these concerns, on
December 4, 1993, the then-Prime Minister of India and the then-Chief
Justice of India convened a conference in New Delhi at which the Chief
Ministers and Chief Justices of the States adopted a Resolution.
It read: “The heads of government and the highest judges agreed that the
courts couldn’t handle everything and that some conflicts were better
suited to being settled through arbitration, mediation, or negotiation. They
stressed the value of parties to a disagreement using alternative dispute
resolution, which can provide procedural flexibility, save time and money,
and reduce the emotional and mental strain of going to trial.”
There is no better option than to work toward develop ing alternative
modes of dispute resolution (ADR) by establishing facilities for providing
settlement of disputes through arbitration, conciliation, mediation, and
neo-arbitration in a developing country like India with major economic
reforms underway within the framework of the rule of law.
The court shall record that the reference is by mutual consent, if the reference is
to arbitration or conciliation, and nothing further is required to be stated in the
order sheet. In case, a need was felt by the court to refer the dispute to any one
of the three processes (i) Lok Adalat (ii) Mediation, and (iii) Judicial
Settlement, the fact has to be mentioned by the court.
The court should also see that reference to ADR is not being used as a delaying
tactic and to prevent misuse, the court should keep track of the dispute by fixing
the date of hearing of "ADR Report" and such date may be from one week to
two months (or more in exceptional cases) depending upon the nature of dispute
and availability of alternative forums. An extra copy of the pleadings may be
taken in order to enable the court to send the same to the ADR forum as the
original copy should remain with the court. As far as the completion of
mediation is concerned, rule 19 of the Uttar Pradesh Civil Procedure Mediation
Rules, 2009 provides that the mediation shall terminate within 60 days of the
date of first appearance before the mediator unless the court itself or on the
request of parties consider it necessary to extend the time but not beyond 90
days in any case.
B. Legal Aid
 CHAPTER 04
KINDS OF ADR MECHANISM

Mainly, ADR system which deals with the consumer disputes/ commercial
dispute/personal or family dispute, are counseling, conciliation, arbitration and
mediation. The selection of ADR system depends upon the nature of disputes
and position and also status of disputants. However, Kinds of ADR are as
under:

1. Counseling
A private meeting with the counselors who is expert in the field involving the
disputed matter, under this mode of alternate mechanism outside Court future
course of remedial action suggested by the counselor which may not have
conciliatory essence. In counseling mechanism, the counselor makes suggestion
regarding remedial measures pertaining to future loss/gain. Since time
immemorial. The one of the simplest forms of ADR programme which may be
carried by an individual expert and counselor's firm dealing with the subject
concerned.
The word 'Counsel' has its origin in the Latin word 'consilium' which means
advice. According to Blacks' Law Dictionary, counsel means advice and
assistance given by one person to another in regard to a legal matter, proposed
line of conduct, claim or contention. As a matter of fact, lawyers are also legal
counsels. Counselor is an attorney; lawyer; member of the lega! profession who
gives legal advice and handles the legal affairs of client, including if necessary
appearing on his or her behalf in civil, criminal or administrative action and
proceedings.

2. Arbitration
Notably, expression "Arbitration" has not been defined under the Arbitration
and Conciliation Act, 1996. However, the definition in Section 2(1Xa) of the
said Act is merely a clarification that the Act covers institutional and ad hoc
arbitration. This definition is based on the definition mentioned in clause (a) of
Article 2 of UNCITRAL Model Law, According to that provision, the
expression "Arbitration" is defined as under -
"Arbitration" is the means by which the parties to a dispute get the matter
settled through the intervention of an agreed third person."
 In other words "Arbitration" is a process that is carried out pursuant to an
agreement to arbitrate the disputed matter. According to the Bombay High
Court the object of arbitration is to decide a dispute, which has arisen.
According to Hals bury-Arbitration' means "the reference of dispute or
difference between not less than two parties, for determination, after hearing
both sides in a judicial manner, by a person or persons other than a Court of
competent jurisdiction."
In view of the above definition of expression 'Arbitration', the ingredients
necessary to constitute the 'arbitration' are as under :
a) There is an arbitration clause in the agreement to resolve the
dispute by means of arbitration.
b) There is dispute between two or more parties.
c) There is arbitrable dispute in terms of agreement between the
parties.
d) Dispute is referred to third person/persons other than a Court of
Competent Jurisdiction.
e) Person or persons constituting arbitration are under obligation to
resolve the dispute/differences in a judicial manner-that is by
hearing of both the parties.

3. Conciliation
The expression 'conciliation' means settlement of a dispute outside the Courts
by reference to a third party. In domestic proceedings it is the process of
assisting parties to deal with the consequences of a marriage/commercial
breakdown and to resolve differences by reaching agreement.
Conciliation is an alternative dispute resolution (ADR) method that allows two
parties to present their sides to a neutral third-party (the conciliator), who then
offers them a non-binding resolution. The parties ca then accept or reject the
proposed resolution voluntarily. Conciliation is a popular way for two parties to
resolve their disputes while also staying out of the Courts. In addition to staying
out of Court, conciliation may encourage both parties to be more open and
communicative with one another. As an ADR, it can be used in both personal
and business disputes. Here are three aspects of conciliation that may come as a
surprise for those more familiar with litigation.
Notably, conciliation is voluntary process by which settlement of dispute
arrived at between parties by the intervention of a third person, who is called
conciliator. Mostly labour disputes are settled though this process as conciliator
is a prerequisite to legal strike or lockout action. Conciliation is now statutorily
recognized and the settlement agreement is binding on the parties. Bunni opines
that conciliation is a more formal process than mediation and it could generally
involve the engagement of legal representatives, thus making it a more
expensive process than mediation. There is, however, the added advantage that
should no amicable solution be reached, the conciliator has the duty to attempt
to persuade the differing parties to accept his own solution to the dispute.
Although, in ordinary sense term conciliation is used as synonymous to
mediation, but there is a thin difference between conciliation and mediation.
Where in a third party is involved informally, who is not provided by any law
that can be called mediation. Thus, mediation may be called as a non statutory
conciliation. At present conciliation is legally recognized and practiced as it has
already been provided under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
(Sections 61 to 81), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Section 89), Legal Service
Authorities Act, 1987 (Sections 19, 20 and 21), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
(Section 12) and Family Courts Act, 1984 including the Hindu Marriage Acts
1955. Even under the statute, conciliation can be a non-binding process upon
the parties. On other hand mediation is also basically a non-binding process
upon the parties, in which there is an impartial third party to mediate, whereas
in conciliation process, conciliator assists the disputing parties in reaching a
mutually agreed settlement.
The process of conciliation involves an impartial third party helping the people
in dispute to resolve their problem. The parties are free to agree to the resolution
or not. In consumer disputes, conciliation is the first stage in the arbitration
process and the conciliation is usually a member of the trade association.

4. Mediation
Literally, expression "Mediation" means the act of a third party relating to the
settling of a dispute between to contending parties.
In other words "Mediation" as an informal process under which the contending
parties elaborate, deliberate and discuss their disputed matter in the presence of
an impartial person, who is supposed to be a neutral person, who assists the
disputing parties in resolving the matter. Notably, Mediation is purely voluntary
mechanism and any resolution must be acceptable and agreed upon by all the
disputants parties to the Mediation. It is true that the Mediation offers the
advantage of informality, with less expense and reduced time needed to settle
dispute, as well as creating less work place disruption. In Mediation process all
discussions are conducted in the strictest confidence.
However, it is necessary that parties to Mediation have at least a basic
knowledge of the process/mechanism and have comfort ability with the process
prior to participation in Mediation proceeding.
Mediation, one form of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), can be an
effective way of resolving a dispute out of Court. It is typically limited to civil
cases, although some non-violent criminal acts (such as harassment) may be
resolved through mediation. Mediation differs from arbitration but they are both
alternatives to litigation. This section contains articles providing an overview of
mediation, the types of cases that may be mediated, how it works with small
claims, and some of its key advantages. Additionally, you can find some
answers to common questions about mediation. Please select from the articles
below to get started.
Mediation is one of several forms of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR).
Mediation is effectively a negotiation that is facilitated by a third party. Unlike
arbitration, where the third party acts as a judge and makes a decision,
mediation does not involve decisions made by the neutral party.
Mediators try to help the parties to a dispute find common ground and reach a
decision that everyone is comfortable with. Mediators oversee the exchange of
information and the bargaining process. They may offer creative solutions and
assist in drafting a final settlement agreement. Mediators also interpret
concerns, relay information between parties, frame issues, and define problems.
Although mediation is usually voluntary, sometimes statutes, rules, or Court
orders can command mediation to take place. Mediations are most commonly
ordered in the context of family, small claims, housing, and sometimes Criminal
Courts.

5. Negotiation
Undoubtedly, "Negotiation" is one of the components of the ADR programme,
however, its main theme is dialogue between two or more conflicting sides by
participation of third person in process of settlement. It is a common mean to
seek settlement.
In the words of Roger Fisher-"The expression 'negotiation' is a kind of
communication designed to reach an agreement when two or more parties have
certain interests that are shared and curtain others that are opposed. Although,
according to Ginny Pearson Banes - Negotiation is a resolution of a
disagreement using give and take within the context of a particular relationship.
It involves sharing ideas and information and seeking a mutually acceptable out
come. U.S.A. based Pepperdine University an explanatory definition of
expression "Negotiation" propounded as under-
"Negotiation is a communication process used to put deals together to resolve
conflicts. It is a voluntary, non binding process in which the parties control the
outcome as well as the procedure by which they will make an agreement.
Because, most parties place very few limitations on the negotiation process, it
allows for a wide range of possible solutions maximizing the possibility of joint
gains".
Negotiation is a dialogue between two or more people or parties intended to
reach a beneficial outcome. This beneficial outcome can be for all of the parties
involved, or just for one or some of them, in situations in which a good outcome
for one/some, excludes the possibility of a desired result for the other/others. It
is aimed to resolve points of difference, to gain advantage for an individual or
collective, or to craft outcomes to satisfy various interests. It is often conducted
by putting forward a position and making small concessions to achieve an
agreement. The degree to which the negotiating parties trust each other to
implement the negotiated solution is a major factor in determining whether
negotiations are successful. Negotiation is not a zero sum game; if there is no
compromise, the negotiations have failed. When negotiations are at an impasse
it is essential that both the parties acknowledge the difficulties, and agree to
work towards a solution at a later date.
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. The study of the subject is called
negotiation theory. Professional negotiators are often specialized, such as union
negotiators, leverage buyout negotiators, peace negotiators, hostage negotiators,
or any work under other titles, such as diplomats, legislators or brokers.

6. Lok Adalat
The Lok Adalat system established by the National Legal Services
Authority Act of 1987 is a distinctively Indian alternative dispute
resolution mechanism, in contrast to the more generic approach used by
the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996. Its literal translation is
“people’s court.” Village elders have always played an important role in
mediating conflicts in India. The Gandhian inspired Lok Adalat system is
an improvement on it. For the purpose of exercising jurisdiction as they
see proper, the State Authority, District Authority, Supreme Court Legal
Services Committee, High Court Legal Services Committee, or Taluk
Legal Services Committee will hold mock courts (called Lok Adalats) on a
periodic basis. People with backgrounds in law, social activism, or judicial
retirement often preside over these. It does not have authority over cases
involving crimes that cannot be “compound.”
Due to the lack of court fees and strict procedural requirements (such as
those found in the Civil Procedure Code or the Evidence Act), the process
can be completed in a short amount of time. Unlike in traditional courts,
the parties involved can speak freely with the judge.
If both parties agree, a case that is already proceeding in a traditional court
system might be moved to a Lok Adalat. If a party petitions the court and
the court, after affording the opposing party an opportunity to be heard,
believes there is a likelihood of settlement, the case may be referred to a
Lok Adalat.
Lok Adalats emphasize cooperative problem solving. When negotiations
fail, the case must be brought before a judge again. If, however, the parties
are able to settle on an agreement, the award will be final and legally
binding. A civil court has issued an order, and it must be obeyed. Because
it is a judgement by consent, the award is final and not subject to appeal
under Article 226.
A Lok Adalat’s proceedings are legally binding, and each Lok Adalat is
treated as an equivalent of a Civil Court.
The government-established Lok Adalat (people’s courts) uses mediation
and consensus-building to resolve disputes. In 1986, Chennai played host
to the first-ever Lok Adalat. Cases pending in ordinary courts within Lok
Adalat’s jurisdiction that are amenable to settlement through conciliation
and compromise are accepted.
A sitting or retired judge acts as chairman of the Lok Adalat, which also
includes two other members who are typically a lawyer and a social
worker. You won’t have to pay anything to the court. If a lawsuit is filed
in ordinary court and later settled at the Lok Adalat, the filing money will
be reimbursed to the plaintiff. The Lok Adalat does not closely adhere to
the procedure norms and the Evidence Act when deciding the validity of a
claim.
The main need of the Lok Adalat is consensus between the disputing
parties. The Lok Adalat’s ruling is final and legally binding on all parties
involved in the case, and its order can be enforced in court. In the event of
a dispute, the Lok Adalat’s decision is final and cannot be challenged.
When it comes to monetary claims, Lok Adalat is extremely efficient.
Since there is usually room for negotiation and compromis e in
matrimonial, damage, and partition proceedings, Lok Adalat is also an
effective forum for resolving these types of disputes.
The public is fortunate to have access to Lok Adalat, a forum for the swift
and inexpensive resolution of legal problems.
 CHAPTER 05
A. ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996

Aims and Objective of the Act

Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for
appointment of Arbitrator by the Chief Justice and Sub-Section (10)
thereof empowers Chief Justice to make appropriate scheme for
dealing with the matters entrusted by Sub-Section (4) or Sub-Section
(5) or Sub-Section (6) of Section 11 of the Act to him. The
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 was enacted by our Parliament
in the year 1996 emphasizing Alternative Dispute Resolution
Mechanism (ADR). The legislature in its wisdom incorporated
Section 89 in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 by way of
amendment in the year 1999 which came into force in the year 2002.
In the prevailing scenario of docket explosion, the implementation of
Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure assumes greater
significance. It needs no mention that Arbitration is one of the ADR
mechanisms. The Arbitral Tribunal is not bound by the Civil
Procedure Code or the Indian Evidence Act, and the parties are free to
agree on the procedure to be followed by the Arbitral Tribunal in
conducting its proceedings. The Arbitral Tribunal is also competent to
pass interim orders, and its supervisory role of the Courts in the
Arbitral process has also been minimized. It is only after the award is
made by the Tribunal, a challenge to the award with regard to the
jurisdiction and merit can be considered by the Court. As an
Alternative Dispute Resolution Mechanism, Arbitration is aimed at
providing inexpensive and speedy justice to the litigating parties. To
facilitate smooth conduct of the Arbitral proceeding as per the
provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and in
furtherance of the legislative intention behind the incorporation of
Section 89 in the Code of Civil Procedure, the High Court of Orissa
Arbitration Centre (OAC) has been established. This resulted in the
enforcement of the said Act. The various objectives of the Act are:
  Cover international and domestic commercial arbitration and
conciliation comprehensively.
 Make a procedure which is fair, efficient and capable of
meeting the needs of the society for arbitration and
conciliation.
 Provides reasons by the tribunal for granting any arbitral
award.
 Ensure that the tribunal does not exercise its jurisdiction
beyond the limits.
 Minimise the role of courts and reduce the burden on the
judiciary.
 It permits the tribunal to opt for arbitration and conciliation as
a method of dispute settlement.
 It makes sure that every award is enforced in the same
manner as the decree of the court.
 It provides that the conciliation agreement reached by the
parties has the same effect as the award granted by an arbitral
tribunal.
 It also works on the enforcement of foreign awards.

Arbitration
According to Section 2 (1)(a) of the Act defines arbitration as to any
arbitration which is either administered or not by a permanent arbitral
institution. It is an alternative to litigation in courts and is
advantageous as it provides flexibility and confidentiality. According
to Black Law Dictionary, it means a method of resolving disputes
which includes two parties and a neutral third party whose decision is
binding on both parties.
Section 8 of the Act talks about the powers of any judicial authority to
refer a case to arbitration. It must be followed by an arbitration
agreement. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P. Anand
Gajapati Raju v. P.V.G Raju (2000) gave certain requirements
necessary for referring parties to arbitration:
  An arbitration agreement must be there.
 A party must bring an action in court against others.

 The subject matter must be the same as in arbitration.

 One party demands arbitration in court.

In another case of Booz Allen and Hamilton Inc. v. SBI Home Finance
Ltd. (2011), it was held that there is no time limit to file an application
but it should be filed before submission of the first statement related
to the dispute. Further, Section 9 provides that the parties to
arbitration may at any time refer to the court for interim measures.

Arbitration Agreement
According to Section 2 (1)(b) of the Act “arbitration agreement”
means an agreement referred to in section 7
1. In this Part, “arbitration agreement” means an agreement by the
parties to submit to arbitration all or certain disputes which have
arisen or which may arise between them in respect of a defined
legal relationship, whether contractual or not.
2. An arbitration agreement may be in the form of an arbitration
clause in a contract or in the form of a separate agreement.
3. An arbitration agreement shall be in writing.
4. An arbitration agreement is in writing if it is contained in—
a. A document signed by the parties.
b. An exchange of letters, telex, telegrams or other means of
telecommunication which provide a record of the
agreement.
c. An exchange of statements of claim and defenses in which
the existence of the agreement is alleged by one party and
not denied by the other.
5. The reference in a contract to a document containing an
arbitration clause constitutes an arbitration agreement if the
contract is in writing and the reference is such as to make that
arbitration clause part of the contract.
An “arbitration agreement” is the reasoned of an arbitration
proceeding. It is only through an arbitration agreement that parties can
submit their issues to be adjudicated by the arbitral tribunal. An
arbitration agreement not only engenders an arbitral tribunal but also
gives shape to it. Therefore, it is crucial to understand the position of
the arbitration agreement under the statute.

International commercial arbitration

International commercial arbitration is an alternative method of
resolving disputes between private parties arising out of
commercial transactions conducted across national a boundary
that allows the parties to avoid litigation in national courts. It
helps to resolve disputes among the international parties arising
out of the internal commercial agreements.
According to Section 2 (1)(f) of the Act “international commercial
arbitration” means arbitration in disputes arising out of a legal
relationship, whether contractual or not and where one party is a
national of another country, a body corporate in another country,
company under the control of any other country or government of a
foreign country.
International commercial arbitration is used by the traders of
different countries as a way of settling their business conflicts.

Arbitral tribunal
According to section 2 (1)(d) of the Act “arbitral tribunal” means a
sole arbitrator or a panel of arbitrators.
An arbitral tribunal is a panel of one or more adjudicators which is
convened and sits to resolve a dispute by way of arbitration. The
tribunal may consist of a sole arbitrator, or there may be two or more
arbitrators, which might include either a chairman or an umpire.
Article 16(3) of the Model Law qualifies the jurisdiction of the
tribunal further by stipulating that:
The arbitral tribunal may rule on a plea (regarding the jurisdiction of
the tribunal) either as a preliminary question or in an award on the
merits. If the arbitral tribunal rules as a preliminary question that it
has jurisdiction, any party may request, within thirty days after having
received notice of that ruling, the court specified in Article 6 to decide
the matter, which decision shall be subject to no appeal; while such a
request is pending, the arbitral tribunal may continue the arbitral
proceedings and make an award.
It has been suggested that Article 16(3) promotes the negative effect
by supporting tribunals to determine their own jurisdiction as a
preliminary question with the provision for expedited, unappeasable
judicial review of the tribunal’s ruling.
The above view of Article 16(3) has received support by some
jurisdictions which have adopted the Model Law and their respective
courts have interpreted the negative effect into this Article.59 In
conclusion, Article 16(3) may be interpreted as a compromise
between the more extreme positions concerning when judicial review
is authorized during the arbitral process.

Arbitration Proceedings
According to section 21 of the Act provides the rules which govern
the commencement of arbitral proceedings. It gives freedom to the
parties to agree and determine when the arbitration proceeding can
officially commence. But in the absence of such an agreement or
where the parties fail to arrive at an agreement, the arbitral
proceedings can commence when one party issues a notice to the
other party, in writing, showing its intention to refer the dispute to
arbitration.
So in respect of a particular dispute, the arbitral
proceeding commences on the date on which a request for that dispute
to be referred to arbitration is received by the other party. In order to
determine the date of receipt, the provisions of Section 3 of the Act
must be looked into.
Arbitral award
The arbitral award or arbitration award refers to an arbitration hearing
decision made by an arbitration tribunal. An arbitral award is equal to
a court judgment. An arbitral award may be non-monetary in nature
where the claims of the entire claimant fail and there is no need for
any party to pay any money.
The arbitral award shall be defined as any arbitral tribunal’s judgment
on the nature of the dispute referred to it and shall include a
temporary, interlocutory or partial arbitral award. The arbitral tribunal
may grant an interim arbitral award on any matter for which it will
make a final arbitral award at any time during the arbitral
proceedings. The interim award may be applied in the same way as a
final award of arbitration. Unless otherwise decided by the parties, a
party may ask the arbitral tribunal to make an additional arbitral
award in respect of the claims raised in the arbitral proceedings but
omitted from the arbitral award within 30 days of receipt of the
arbitral award. An arbitral award can be categorised into:
a. Domestic Award: Domestic award are those awards which are
the outcomes of domestic arbitration. It is confined to the
territory of India, the parties should have a nexus or birth of
Indian origin, the territory essentially comes into play for
domestic arbitration purposes. The award given by an arbitral
tribunal in India or an award, even if it is given by a foreign
state for a dispute in which both parties are of Indian origin and
the nationality is also regulated by Indian law, also falls within
the scope of domestic arbitration.
b. Foreign Award: Foreign Award is the outcome of Foreign
Arbitration. If the parties choose a foreign arbitration institution
or agree to an ad hoc arbitration overseas, the award granted
after such proceedings shall be referred to as foreign award.
Arbitrability of Disputes
Before proceeding with the arbitration, every arbitral tribunal is
obliged to look into the arbitration agreement. Arbitral tribunal
considers whether dispute is abatable according to the national public
policy of the seat of arbitration as they affect tribunal’s jurisdiction
with respect to the dispute. National public policy varies considerably
from one jurisdiction to the other based on the socio-economic
structure of the society.
“New York Convention” provides for various exceptions to the
general obligation contained in “Article II” to enforce written
arbitration agreements. One of such exceptions is contained in
“Article II (1)” which provides for non-arbitrability of disputes, which
are not capable of settlement by arbitration. Also, “Article V(2)(a)”
provides that an arbitral award need not be recognized if the subject
matter of the difference is not capable of settlement by Arbitration
under the law of the country where recognition is sought.
National legislations often lay down the subject matter of disputes
which are not capable of settlement by arbitration usually due to
claims being considered to be of public importance or requiring the
application of formal judicial procedures and protections.
The term “arbitrability” of the disputes has been defined by scholars
like Blackaby, Partasides, Redfern and Hunter, who have stated that
arbitrability "involves determining which types of dispute may be
resolved by arbitration and which belong exclusively to the domain of
the Courts". While on the other hand, Gary Born explains the doctrine
of non-arbitrability and states that, “Non-arbitrability doctrine rests on
the notion that some matters so pervasively involve ‘public’ rights
and concerns, or interests of third parties, which are the subjects of
uniquely governmental authority, that agreements to resolve such
disputes by ‘private’ arbitration should not be given effect”.
Arbitrability can be further be divided into two types, which are as
follows: When issue related to the capacity of the parties arise, it is
called “subjective arbitrability or arbitrability rationae personae” and
When subject-matter of the dispute cannot be arbitrated under a
domestic law, it is called “objective arbitrability or
arbitrability rationae materiae”.
It has been concluded by various authorities that the questions relating
to arbitrability of disputes under Article II(1) and Article V(2)(a) of
New York Convention are of similar nature. Thus, it means that if
Arbitration of a dispute or a claim cannot proceed under Article II(1)
due to non-arbitrability of the dispute, then the award pertaining the
particular dispute is generally subject to non-recognition under Article
V(2)(a) of New York Convention.
Some countries have created a list of disputes that can be submitted to
arbitration like in the case of French Civil Code, Article 2060, states
that: “One may not enter into arbitration agreements in matters of
status and capacity of the persons, in those relating to divorce and
judicial separation or on controversies concerning the public bodies,
institutions and more generally in all matters which concern public
policy.”
Article 2059 of “French Civil Code” simultaneously declares that “all
persons can make arbitration agreements of rights that they may
freely dispose”. This principle of differentiation has been followed by
“Dutch Code of Civil Procedure” and “Spanish Arbitration Act,
2003”.
Germany follows a liberal approach with Section 1030 of “German
Civil Procedure Code (CCP)” while defining arbitrability; it states
that, “Any claim involving an economic interest can be the subject of
an arbitration agreement. An arbitration agreement concerning claims
not involving an economic interest shall have legal effect to the extent
that the parties are entitled to conclude a settlement on the issue in
dispute”. At the same time, it explicitly declares that the disputes
relating to existence of a lease of residential accommodation are non-
abatable (Section 1030(2), CCP). Section 1030(3) of “German Civil
Procedure Code” further clarifies that the other laws may contain
additional exceptions. Disputes in relation to antitrust law,
competition law, and IP law are generally abatable under German
arbitration regime.
 B. LEGAL SERVICE AUTHORITIES ACT, 1987

i. Aims & Objectives

The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987, is aimed to provide free
and competent Legal Services to the weaker sections of the society to
ensure that opportunities for securing justice are not denied to any
citizen by reason of economic or other disabilities and to organize
Lok Adalats to secure that the operation of the legal system promotes
justice on a basis equal opportunity. Creating legal awareness, legal
aid and settlement of disputes through amicable settlement are the
main functions of the Authority.
Legal awareness programmers are taken up for empowerment of legal
knowledge to all the citizens in general and to the weaker sections of
the society in particular. Various activities are taken up to reach the
vulnerable sections of the society such as SC/ST, Women, and
Industrial Laborers etc. The Authority provides legal aid by way of
providing the services of able efficient services of Lawyers. Any
person, who fulfills the criteria, is entitled for the Legal Aid. Lok
Adalats organized by the Authorities and the Taluk Committees help
the disputing parties to come to settlement through conciliation and
such settlement reached before a Lok Adalat becomes a record having
equal status as that of a judgment/decree of the Court.

ii. Important Provisions under Legal Services Authorities Act,

1987
The main core of the Legal Services Authorities Act 1987 is the
hierarchical legal service institutions in the district, state and centre,
criteria for providing legal aid, Lok Adalat and free legal aid. The
hierarchical legal service system in India exists at three levels. They
are:
a) National Legal Services Authority
In response to Section 4 of the Act, NALSA has been established to
provide free legal aid to all citizens of the country. The body has been
established by the government. It is headed by the Chief Justice of
India, patron-in-chief. The executive chairman of the organisation is a
retired or serving judge of the Supreme Court of India. The nominees
are selected by the president after consultation with the Chief Justice
of India. An advisory committee referred to as the Supreme Court
Legal Services Committee is formed by the central authority. A
significant objective of the NALSA is to ensure that justice is equally
distributed among citizens, regardless of economic or other factors.
Power & Functions
1. Lay down policies and principles for fulfilling the provisions
of the Legal Services Act.
2. Frame the most economic schemes for providing legal aid to
the poor.
3. Utilize funds at their disposal to be given to the State and
District authorities.
4. Organize Legal Aid camps in rural and slum areas.
5. Undertake and promote research in the field of Legal aid,
with special emphasis on providing legal aid to the poor.
6. To do all things necessary for the fulfillment of fundamental
duties given under Part IV-A of the Constitution.
7. Develop in consultation with the Bar Council of India,
programs for clinical legal education.
8. Take appropriate measures for spreading legal literacy and
legal awareness amongst the people and, in particular, to
educate weaker sections of society.
9. Make special efforts to enlist the support of voluntary social
welfare institutions working at the grass-root level.
10. Coordinate and monitor the functions of State Authorities,
District Authorities, Supreme Court Legal Services
Committee, High Court Legal Services Committees, Taluk
Legal Services Committees and voluntary social service
Institutions and other legal services organizations and give
general directions for the proper implementation of the
program.
11. Provide grants and aids for various schemes and social
service institutions.
 b) State Legal Services Authority
Each state has a legal service authority, which provides free legal
advice to those who cannot afford it. This is covered under Section
6 of the Act. They provide preventative and strategic legal assistance
programs. Lok Adalat sessions are also conducted by the authorities
to assist clients. Among their main duties is to implement the policies
and schemes as directed by NALSA. The respective High Court’s
chief justices serve as patrons-in-chief. These bodies are supervised
by an executive chairman who is a retired or serving judge. A high
court legal service committee is usually formed by the state authority.
This body is headed by a sitting High Court judge, who is the
chairman and is administered by the Chief Justice of the respective
High Court.
Power & Functions
The state authority has the responsibility to give effect to the
directions issued by the Central authority. It provides legal services
like the central authority and also conducts Lok Adalats. Besides this
the authority also has other functions as follow:
1. Give legal services to persons who satisfy the criteria under
the act.
2. Conduct Lok Adalats for all types of cases
3. Undertake preventive and strategic Legal Aid programs.
4. Perform other functions as notified by the central authority to
the state authority from time to time.

c) District Legal Services Authority

Member of the DLSA- District Judge as its chairman, other members
nominated by the state government in consultation with the Chief
Justice of High court. Every district authority has to give effect to
such directions that are issued to it by the State authority, it also has to
take cognizance of the directions that are given by the state authority.
Power & Functions
The district authority has the following functions that it needs to
perform
1. Coordinate the activities of the Taluk Legal Services
Committee and other legal services in the District.
2. Organized Lok Adalats within the District.
3. Perform such other functions as the State Authority may fix
by regulations.

iii. Lok Adalat

Meaning:
The Supreme Court has explained the meaning of the institution of the
Lok Adalat in the following way1 "The Lok Adalat is an old form of
adjudicating system prevailed in ancient India and its validity has not
been taken away even in the modern days too ". Here, the word ' Lok
Adalat ' means 'People's Court' it shows it is available at ground root
level also. It is one of the components of ADR (Alternate Dispute
Resolution) system. Lok Adalat provides alternate resolution of
disputes with inexpensive mode and speedy justice. It is based on
Gandhian principles as it supports peaceful resolution of disputes
among parties by means of compromise. In Lok Adalat proceedings,
there are no victors, vanquished and rancour. As Indian courts are
overburdened with the backlog of cases and the regular courts are to
decide the cases involving a lengthy, expensive and tedious
procedure, Lok Adalat is introduced for speedy justice.

Significance of Lok Adalats

In our justice-delivery system, the litigant, who forms the very
foundation of the judicial structure is also the one who is most
neglected in the system. It is imperative to reach the goal of equal
access to justice, which is a Constitutional commandment and
statutory imperative. The unmanageable burden of pending cases,
unmanageable arrears, and delay in disposal of cases in courts at all
levels-lowest to the highest-along with high expenses have
undoubtedly attracted the attention of the lawyers, litigants, social
activists, legal academicians, and parliament but also Judges of the
courts. At present the arrears of cases as so huge that unless they are
disposed of on a war footing the system may crumble down in a few
years' time. It appears that the current justice delivery system in this
country is about to collapse. So, it is natural that the alarming
situation of the Indian judiciary has attracted the attention of anyone
concerned with law reforms.
The pertinent question that arises, therefore, is how to reduce the
delay in disposal of cases, make the system resilient by removing its
stratification, making the system less formal and inexpensive so as to
make justice within the reach of the poor. If truth be told, the existing
legal system has remained unfortunately alien having no direct
contact with masses and is not at all meaningful to them. The
surprising growth in the arrears of cases has compelled the members
of the Law Commission of India to deliberate on the revival of the
indigenous legal system and recommended it‘s restructuring to
provide a new model or mechanism for dissolving disputes on the
principles of participatory justice. A need has been felt for the
decentralization of the system of administration of justice to reduce
the volume of work.
In various countries, such as the United States of America and
western countries such as England and France, the contribution of the
Bar in rendering free and competent legal-aid is praiseworthy and it
must be adopted in India. Lawyers must respond with juristic
sensitivity to the voice of weak, poor, suppressed, and exploited
women and destitute children so as to create an equal society for them
in which they can prosper. The bar must evolve a scheme to ensure
that poor are able to afford justice. The advocates are the
cornerstones of the legal services who ensure compliance with our
Constitution, lex suprema and ensure the statutory rights of the needy
and deserving citizens of our country. The purpose of the Lok Adalat
was/has been to provide a supplementary system to the mainstream
legal system. The sanctity for holding Lok Adalat or people's court
lies in the growing dissatisfaction with the existing legal system and
the need for immediate relief for poor, helpless, economically and
socially disadvantaged position, etc., who are in distressed familiar
circumstances. The requirement of immediate redressal and speedy
disposal of disputes was felt most acutely in the present socio-legal
circumstances.

Powers of the Lok Adalat

The Lok Adalat for determination of any matter under this Act will
have the same powers, that of a civil court that has been granted to it
under the Code of Civil Procedure 1908. The powers of the Lok
Adalat are as follows:
1. The summoning and enforcing the attendance of any witness
and examining him on oath.
2. The discovery and production of any document.
3. The reception of evidence on affidavits.
4. The requisitioning of any public record or document or copy
of such record or document from any court or office.
5. Such other matters as may be prescribed.