Dear Editor,
I thought the article on dispute resolution (Deadlock) in last month’s issue of India Business Law Journal conveyed a more than necessarily negative impression of arbitration in India – almost like sounding its death knell. Despite its many shortcomings, arbitration continues to be the most effective form of dispute resolution in India, particularly in matters involving an extensive trial, like those arising out of construction contracts or software development agreements. The process of recording of evidence can be completed within a period of a few months, as compared to the many years that could be consumed by the courts for the same process.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
I do agree that what is required is the emergence of a new bunch of quick and effective arbitrators, bound by the procedures laid down by institutional arbitration. I believe this change is already underway.
The delay in implementation of awards because of objections and appeals getting stuck in courts for years is unfortunate. However, the remedy does not lie in further curtailing the already restricted powers of civil courts to intervene (an inherently undemocratic development), or amending the Arbitration and Conciliation Act to encourage foreign arbitrations. It lies in utilizing more of the nation’s resources to strengthen the courts and make them more effective.
Mukul Talwar
Advocate
New Delhi
[/ihc-hide-content]
