The Paradox Of Alternative Dispute Resolution: Exposing Structural Inconsistencies In Section 89 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure, 1908
- IJLLR Journal
- Jan 17
- 1 min read
Pushkar Santosh Bapatla, Gujarat National Law University, Gandhinagar, Gujarat
Asmi Shah, Symbiosis Law School, Pune, Maharashtra
ABSTRACT
Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, was introduced to alleviate India’s judicial backlog by integrating Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) into the formal legal system. However, this article argues that the provision is fundamentally flawed due to structural inconsistencies and drafting errors, such as the "definitional chaos" that interchanged the procedural requirements for mediation and judicial settlement. The framework further suffers from procedural overlaps with the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and a confusing landscape of consent requirements where some ADR modes are mandatory while others require mutual agreement. While the Supreme Court’s ruling in Afcons Infrastructure provided necessary interpretative clarity, the article concludes that judicial intervention cannot replace the need for a comprehensive legislative overhaul or dedicated statutes like the Mediation Bill 2021 to ensure effective dispute resolution.
