By- Manik Pahuja from Sardar Patel Subharti Institute of law, Swami Vivekanand Subharti University

Introduction

The judiciary is the third and significant organ of the government of India which is assigned various duties and functions under various provisions of the Constitution of India 1950. It is responsible for the delivery of justice to the aggrieved party before it for adjudication of disputes. The foremost function and responsibility of the courts of law is an interpretation of laws and an admiration of justice for all its citizens. With these duties and roles, the judicial wing often gets pressurized and burdened with the multitude of lawsuits and cases which affects its functions and the ability to settle the matters efficiently. To overcome this workload and bundle of cases the mechanism of ADR came into force.
The Indian judiciary is laboriously bundled with a backlog of cases, with above 60,000 cases in the Supreme Court, 4.47 million in several High Courts of the States, and 31.4 million in district and subordinate courts as of November 2019, leading to increasing acceptance of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methodologies.
The pendency of cases in the courts of law is a matter of serious concern as it is harming the objectives and aims of the constitution i.e right to a speedy trial under article 21 of the Indian constitution as held in the case of Hussainara Khatoon vs State of Bihar which is the fundamental right of a citizen. Hence there’s a need for an alternative system.

Meaning and concept of ADR

ADR stands for alternative dispute resolution which serves as an alternative way to get the disputes resolved. It is an amicable way to negotiate the differences and issues among the parties to the dispute. ADR is an informal system outside the court involving a third neutral party to address and settle the disputes for dispute settlement which provides various methods for settlement including arbitration, negotiation, mediation, conciliation, Lok Adalat, etc. The main objective of ADR is to reduce the burden of the court and manage the cases effectively and efficiently.
ADR offers to settle all types of cases including civil, commercial, business, industrial, family, etc. but not criminal cases including heinous and serious crimes, they are to be adjusted by the courts only.
ADR is also set up by the fundamental rights which are provided under articles 14 and 21 which deal with equality before the law and the right to life and personal liberty respectively. ADR’s motive is to provide social-economic and political justice and maintain unification in the society venerated in the preamble. It also strives to achieve justice and free legal aid as the duty of state provided under article 39-A relating to the Directive Principle of State Policy(DPSP) which is not enforceable in court but is to be followed by the government in making policies for the welfare of the public.

Techniques of ADR

Alternative dispute resolution is a cost-effective and less time-consuming method of settlement of disputes involving the third party who needs to be fair and unbiased in the dealings. The mechanism of ADR suggests the following techniques for settling disputes by peaceful means

Arbitration: it is the first technique used in ADR to settle disputes outside the court which is considered formal in comparison to other techniques of alternative dispute settlement mechanism. Arbitration is a process that can be initiated only based on an arbitration agreement or the consent of both parties. The arbitrators are appointed by the parties themselves which can be sole or must be in odd numbers. The decisions or awards given by arbitrators are final but are subject to appeal in some conditions provided under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.
Conciliation: it is the second less formal method or technique used by the parties to resolve disputes. Conciliation is the process in which a conciliator is appointed by the parties. The procedure of conciliation is initiated by serving the notice from one party to another. If the notice to conciliate is accepted by the other party the procedure of conciliation can be initiated by presenting the statement of facts. The conciliator can conduct a joint session with both parties to the disputes or meet separately with each party and address the issues among them. After framing the issues the conciliator may give his recommendations for terms of settlement. The parties may accept or reject the recommendation, unlike arbitration where the decision of arbitrators is binding on both parties.
Mediation: is the process in which a neutral is appointed as a mediator between the parties to the dispute. A mediator has no role in the proceedings; he just has to serve as an unbiased and supportive character. A mediator understands the situation and fills the communication gap between the parties by addressing the issue of one party to another party facilitating a term of settlement agreed by both parties. The process of mediation is controlled by the parties.
Negotiation: is the process where no third party is appointed or selected to serve between the disputing parties. Negotiation is conducted by the parties to the dispute themselves where both the parties negotiate their terms and conditions for resolving and settling up the dispute by redressing their issues and differences.
Lok Adalat: Lok Adalat is a system of apportionment of justice that has come into existence to combat the problem of giving cheap and speedy justice to the public. Lok Adalat as the name itself suggests means people’s court. Lok means the people and the Adalat refers to the court. It is a symposium where disputes or cases pending in the court of law or at the stage before litigation are compromised and accommodated amicably. Lok Adalats have been given the status of a statutory body under the Legal Services Authorities Act, of 1987. Under the Act, the award or decision given by the Lok Adalats is deemed to be a decree given by a civil court and is final and binding on all parties and no appeal can lay against it before any court of law.

Legal framework of ADR

Civil Procedure Code, 1908: Section 89 states that if it appears to the court there can be a settlement outside the court then the court can formulate the terms and conditions of the possible settlement and refer the same for Arbitration, Conciliation, Mediation, or Lok Adalat which is more suitable as depending upon the case.
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: The Act covers the whole procedure of arbitration and conciliation from a selection of arbitration, no. of arbitrators, qualifications, and disqualifications of arbitrators to the awards passed as a decision of the arbitration panel which is binding on the parties as it is followed by the consensus procedure. The Act also provides for the enforcement of domestic awards as well as foreign awards.
The Legal Services Authority Act, 1987: Lok Adalat is one of the alternative dispute resolutions; it is a convocation where disputes or cases pending in the court of law or at the pre-litigation stage are compromised and settled peacefully. Statutory recognition was provided to the Lok Adalat under the Legal Services Authority Act and several functions and powers to hearten and pepping up the dispute settlement by techniques of negotiation, mediation, arbitration, and conciliation were provided to the Lok Adalats.
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947: The technique of mediation was first recognized by the Indian legislature in the Industrial Dispute Act where it was encouraged to be used as an alternative to the lawsuits filed in the courts.

Integrating ADR into Legal Education

In today’s fast-paced legal environment, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) has emerged as a significant and important component for resolving conflicts outside traditional courtrooms. As legal systems evolve, the integration of ADR into legal education becomes increasingly necessary.
With the legal landscape progressing rapidly, incorporating ADR into legal education as a subject of their course is crucial for preparing the next generation of lawyers to navigate and resolve conflicts effectively.
ADR can help law students and upcoming law professionals to face and amicably resolve disputes outside the courtrooms reducing the workload of the courts. There are several cases in the courts, as of now above 80,000 cases pending in the Supreme Court of India which involve some frivolous and unimportant cases that are filed in the name of public interest litigation merely for gaining public attention and limelights, ADR if included as a core subject in the curriculum of the universities conducting the law programs and courses may enhance the growth and development of the judiciary as well as the nonjudicial organs working as a nonprofit organization helping the people in need.

Recent highlights

Recently Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud (on May 06, 2024), while delivering a speech at the UK Supreme Court, opined that now is the time for countries such as India to focus on building a strong culture of commercial arbitration.
The Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud on (March 31, 2023) emphasized the need for the union government to switch from adversarial litigation to alternative dispute resolution routes, particularly mediation, to ‘de-clog’ Indian courts, and promote an alternative, collaborative, interest-based conception of justice.

Conclusion

ADR is the fastest growing and developing mechanism in the field of settlement of disputes other than courts of law as it has various advantages over the judiciary. It is cost-effective, less time-consuming, flexible, dynamic, economical, innovative, and creative, and maintains the confidentiality of the matters. Integrating ADR into legal education can be useful for building the next generation of lawyers to meet the demands of a complex and dynamic legal landscape. By equipping law students with the knowledge and skills necessary for effective dispute resolution, legal education can contribute to a more efficient, equitable, and responsive justice system. ADR provides several techniques to resolve disputes such as arbitration, negotiation, mediation, conciliation, etc. The disputing parties can opt for any of these which is suitable to their case.