Describe a detail research on how judiciary in each and every possible way has help in promoting and uplifting the working system in Alternative Dispute Resolution

1. ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN
PROMOTING ADR
Presented BY,
Steffi Michelle Wanniang
1 Yr LL.M. (Business Law)
I.D.: 596.

2. INTRODUCTION
 Justice Delivery Institutions are trusted to bring about justice, but at
present moment it seems that the judiciary particularly has been
facing a lot of crises which has resulted in the delay of solving
disputes and also the disposal of matters like commercial and any
other civil matters
 In India a person can go for the ADR process through the
power and rule which has conferred to him under the different
statutes like the terms of CPC Amendment Act, 2002,
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1997 and Legal Services
Authorities( Amendment) Act, 2002
 With the development of the ADR mechanism it has pave a
way for the improvement in the judiciary which has also led to
the competition in the Judiciary system to improve their legal
system of working.
 Both are complementary to each other
 Side by side sharing of roles which brings judicial efficiency

3. POWERS AND ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN
ADR
 The judiciary has an important role to play in the
ADR process as because many blame that the
formality, technicality, and adversarial nature of
courtroom proceedings for producing results
ultimately unsatisfactory to many parties.
 The most important point to be noted, the
rationale that the judiciary played in ADR is
by encouraging and allowing the parties to
settle their disputes through this mechanism
because of the overcrowded cases in the
Court

4. Cont….
 Sec 89 of CPC therefore gives the power where
the judge can refer any matter for settling of the
disputes through arbitration, conciliation, judicial
settlement, mediation or through Lok Adalats
 When the matter is settled through conciliation,
the settlement agreement shall have the same
status and effect as if it is an arbitral award U/S 74
of AC Act and therefore it is enforceable as a
decree of the court by virtue of section 36 of the
AC Act.
 when a settlement takes place before the Lok
Adalat, the award of the Lok Adalat is deemed to
be a decree of a civil court U/S 21 of LSA Act 1987
and executable as such.

5. ROLE OF JUDICIARY IN ARBITRATION
 The court shall not intervene in any matter relating to the
arbitration except those which are provided in Part -1 of the
said Act:
1. Power to refer parties to arbitration where there is an
arbitration agreement(section 8).
2. Power to make interim order in respect of subject-matter of
dispute ( Section 9).
3. Power to appoint arbitrators in the event of failure of
disagreement by parties to arbitration agreement (section
11).
4. Power to decide on the termination of mandate of the
arbitration[Sec 14(2)].
5. Power of assistance in taking evidence (section 27).
6. Power to set aside an award (section 34).
7. Power to give further opportunity to arbitral tribunal to
resume arbitral proceedings for elimination of grounds for
setting aside [sec34(4)].

6. Contd……
8. Power to enforce Arbitral Award (section 36).
9. Power to hear appeal (section 37).
10. Power to order delivery of award on payment of
cost to the court[section 38(2)].
11. Power to make order of costs of arbitration in
absence of sufficient provisions made in award
[section 39(4)].
12. Power of determination of question relating to
insolvency proceedings [Section 41(2)].
13. Power to extend time for reference to
arbitration of time barred future disputes [section
43(3).
 Judiciary role therefore should encouraged
parties settling disputes through an ADR
mechanisms

7. POWER OF THE JUDICIARY IN
ARBITRATION
 The traditional modes of disputes resolution were not suited for
settlement of commercial and other contractual disputes involving
high monetary claims founded on the statutory laws.
 Under the Arbitration Act, 1940, the jurisdiction of the court could be
invoked by a party for the following purposes:-
1. To appoint an arbitrator(in certain cases).
2. To set aside the appointment of a sole arbitrator made by any party
(in certain circumstances);
3. To remove an arbitrator;
4. To revoke the authority of an arbitrator or to revoke a reference ;
5. To obtain an order that the arbitration agreement should have no
effect;
6. To pronounce opinion, when a special case was stated by an
arbitrator;
7. To have an award filed in court, after it was pronounced, in order to
obtain a decree in terms of the award;
8. To pronounce judgement according to the award and pass a
decree.

8. THE JUDICIARY IN THE DEVELOPMENT AND
ENHANCEMENT OF THE ADR SYSTEM
 The judiciary aim is to protect the rights of the citizens
and that they should resolve the matters with the full
aim of accessing justice, but with the overloading in the
number of cases this process has failed
 the legislature felt a strong need to set up ADR where
matters can be solved out of the court and so provisions
has been set up where the court will have the powers to
refer matters fit for ADR to go through this process, the
judiciary gives full support to the ADR
 The court should enlightened the path for the ADR to
get a legal recognition and provide them about the
judiciary knowledge.
 Should work simultaneously

9. COURT AND ADR
 The ADR method is believed to satisfy both
the parties as the matters solve there is of a
win-win situation and not one sided lost
 The courts also encourage the parties to
refer to the ADR mechanisms for settling
of their disputes.
 Even Government agencies they are
motivated to acquire and resolve
conflicts through the private
management system. The ADR and the
judicial field can both work
simultaneously and sort out if there is
any overlapping in their working method.

10. INTERVENTION OF COURTS: A WAY TO ADR
IMPROVEMENT
 There are three ways where the court
can interfere. They are as follows:
1. The procedure in special cases to
determined the questions of Law it has
to be determined by the court;
2. For using injunction;
3. For granting any auxiliary or
interlocutory measures to be given by
the court.
 The court can intervene only in cases
covered by Section 14, section 34 and
37

11. LOK ADALAT AS AN EFFECTIVE ADR IN
INDIA IN COMPARISON WITH JUDICIARY
 The Lok Adalat is known as the
Peoples court. It is also very well known
for speedier forms of giving justice
 The advent of Legal Services Authorities
Act, 1987 gave a statutory status to
Lok Adalats provisions for settlement of
dispute.
 The Lok Adalat aim is to provide free
legal aid to the weaker sections in the
society and the poor people who could
not afford court procedure, it assures
securing justice to all either economically

12. LOK ADALAT PROCEDURE COMPARED WITH
COURTS PROCEDURE
 In each and every state there exists a High Court and
at the apex there is the Supreme Court of India also
there are subordinate courts in the Judicial System
 These courts decide the various matters right from
petty case to civil, criminal and commercial cases
 U/S 19 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 Lok
Adalats can be organized. Matters, such as
Matrimonial/Family Disputes, Criminal (Compoundable
Offences) cases, Land Acquisition Cases, Labour
Disputes, Workmen's Compensation cases, Bank
Recovery cases, Pension cases, Housing Board and
slum clearance cases & Housing Finance cases.
Consumer Grievance cases, Electricity matters,
disputes relating to Telephone Bills, Disputes with
Cellular Companies . etc

13. COMPARATIVE STUDY
United Kingdom: IN UK there is a
strong opinion by the legal experts that
parties should be encouraged to settle
the matters outside the court through the
process of ADR because of the cost
which is expensive in litigation.
In the Woolf report in UK t does not
confine only to settle matters in the court
but it however encourages the parties to
also go through the ADR mechanism for
commercial purpose, to lighten the
burden of the Courts

14. Contd……
 SINGAPORE: The ADR system in
Singapore is one of the most successful one which
is one of the good examples for smaller countries
like Singapore. The judicial system in Singapore
has been one of the most developed one. They
introduce and focus on mediation because they
also believed that the procedure in the formal court
is a lengthy process and that the adjudication
nature is different
 The Courts through the ADR system can also offer
effective and appropriate methods for the resolving
the disputes
 With the growth in the financial industry and
liberalising it has also led to the growth in the ADR
system.

15. CASE REFERENCES
ONGC V. Collector of Central Excise [
1992 supp2 SCC 432] [ONGC I]
Chief Conservator of Forests v.
Collector (2003) 3 SCC 472 ONGC
I AND II
 In this case the SC had issued
directions that the parties
should not try the litigation in
the court because it will just
be a waste of time and money
but they refer the cases to the
ADR , arbitration because
being a public sector
undertaking it should not
waste the public money in
trying the litigation through
the formal method which is
very costly. The dispute here
was between the public sector
undertaking and that of GOI.
 The court in this case
held that it should rely on
other mechanisms for
resolving the disputes
but not to go through the
litigation process instead
the interdepartmental
controversies should be
contested and solve
amicably among the
parties through any of
the ADR mechanism.

16. CONCLUSION AND SUGGESTIONS
 ADR and the Judiciary should work simultaneously
and hand in hand as because they are both
dependable on each other
 The court should encourage the parties to settle
disputes amicably through the ADR mechanisms.
 speedy resolution in commercial matters it will not
barred the parties to continue their cases which can
help the economy of the country because of the
growth of trade
 The intervention of the courts in the ADR process
should be minimal and can only intervene if necessary
to, more scope should be given to the ADR process.
 The arbitrator who tries to be impartial court should be
strict and that they are accountable for any liability
commit on their part.

17. Contd…..
 Arbitrator should be given training and such advocacy
programmes should be organised by the Judiciary to
give them and trained them the proper method to
conduct themselves in ADR process.
 It is highly suggested that in a country like India where
the ADR process is highly increasing with more cases
coming up there should be an arbitration advocacy
under the Arbitration Act which should be initiated by
the Judiciary so as to allow ADR to solve more litigation
and dispute cases in India.
 However to improve ADR process there are three steps
suggested:
1. Cases should be made mandatory to reference to
ADRs
2. The case should be managed by the Judges
3. There should be a co-operation and committed teams
among the Judges ,Lawyers And arbitrators