Beyond Speed: Equality, Access And The Credibility Of Arbitration In India
Shiraz Zafar, NLU Punjab
ABSTRACT
Arbitration is often defended as a faster, more flexible alternative to court litigation. In India, however, the legitimacy of arbitration depends on more than procedural speed: parties must be able to enter the process on reasonably equal terms, obtain a fair hearing, and secure an award that is meaningfully enforceable. This essay argues that the principal challenge for Indian arbitration is not a simple choice between party autonomy and judicial intervention. It is the design of a credible dispute-resolution system in which autonomy is protected from structural inequality, courts supervise without retrying the merits, and costs and institutional capacity do not make the remedy inaccessible. The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 supplies a modern framework, and recent decisions on unilateral appointments and limited award modification show a judiciary attempting to reconcile fairness with finality. Yet ad hoc practice, asymmetrical appointment clauses, post-award challenges, and uneven access continue to weaken arbitration’s promise. The essay evaluates the statutory scheme and leading decisions, then proposes practical reforms centred on transparent appointments, proportionate procedure, stronger institutions, and disciplined judicial review.
Keywords: Arbitration; India; party autonomy; equal treatment; arbitral award; judicial review; access to justice.
