Time Limits In Arbitration: Boon Or Burden? An Indian Perspective On Efficiency, Due Process, And The Quest For Speedy Justice
Dr. Vinod Kumar Meena, Assistant Professor, Faculty of Law, Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
Naveen Kumar Meena, Research Scholar, Faculty of Law, Jai Narain Vyas University, Jodhpur (Rajasthan)
ABSTRACT
In India, arbitration has commonly been used as a reasonable alternative to court litigation with an expectation of quicker resolution of disputes. However, there have been numerous instances of domestic arbitration being impacted by lengthy proceedings, which has resulted in decreased confidence in the system and limited the practical benefits of arbitration. To address this issue, Parliament passed Section 29A as part of the 2015 Amendment and modified this provision in the 2019 amendment establishing a time limit of twelve (12) months for the completion of domestic arbitral proceedings with an allowance for an additional six (6) month extension through mutual consent and thereafter only upon the order of the court. This study considers whether fixed dates to relate not only to how well existing laws in this area can be used to solve problems with delays, but also how they may affect new issues related to the arbitration process. As well as providing a framework that can promote efficiency and accountability, fixed deadlines can lead to placing unreasonable pressure on an arbitrator to accelerate decisions, thereby sacrificing procedural due process and quality of the rendered award. This study seeks to document and compare the statutory development of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, court decisions relating to it, and how Section 29A is implemented in practice. Additionally, by examining both England and Singapore, this paper compares the different methods of emphasising between efficiency and procedural fairness within the three different countries' respective legal systems. Suggestions for reforms which strengthen the ability of Section 29A to operate effectively while ensuring its viability and integrity, which are both necessary to maintain a credible system of arbitration, will be provided at the end of the study.
Keywords: Arbitration; Time Limits; Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996; Due Process; Prompt Justice; India
