The 5th Leg Of Judicial Intervention, A Question On The Reputation Of India As An Arbitral Seat

Sunidhi Mathur, Centre for Legal Studies, GIBS, Rohini, New Delhi.

ABSTRACT

Man does not live in isolation, in today’s interconnected world, conflicts are an inseparable and inevitable part of the humankind.

It is human nature to have various demands and needs, with the arousal of such needs, a want to fulfill them arises, but with limited resources at hand, fulfillment of all wants is not possible, thus disputes are bound to emerge.

Resolution of disputes is a pre- eminent aspect of a society, even before the advent of the courts, people used various methods to resolve disputes. The system of outside court settlements is not a new one, it has been a long-going practice. Primordial, non- judicial methods of resolving disputes have often been employed by various communities at large.

It is believed that traditional litigation along with being a tedious process, often leaves parties bruised, displeased and fragmented, in turn escalating hostility and bitterness among people. Over a period of time, people have been inclining more towards methods of alternative dispute resolutions. This has led to an increase in the demand and development of such methods in the country.

Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) methods offer a more compassionate, advantageous and tailored approach in solving conflicts. Preference of these methods over the conventional litigation system, has led to major recent developments of this field and led to the advancement of pro- arbitration approach in India.

But is India with all its nuances of the arbitral system, a satisfactory arbitral seat? Is what this research paper aims to analyze in the view of the recent DMRC v/s DAMEPL1 case and its Supreme court ruling. In this historic case, the Supreme Court by taking an out of the ordinary course decided to revisit its division bench’s ruling and overturned an arbitral award of nearly 8,000 crore which had been pending for more than a decade.