Alternative Dispute Resolution

It is believed that wherever there is existence of more than one human being, so called ‘a human society’, there ought to be disputes between individuals. In today’s state of that human society, disputes are inevitable as there are differences between individuals in every sphere and respect. In olden days such disputes were redressed by the head of the state or the ‘King’. But today law is the king of all kings and thus disputes are resolved by the machinery framed by law.
Disputes can either arise out of infringement of personal rights or that of social rights like right to life, freedom etc. The former is termed as civil dispute and the latter as criminal dispute. The court system in India is no new and its origination can be traced back to the ancient times. Kautilya in his ‘Arthasastra’ has mentioned that there was a two tier system for administration of justice, i.e.  separate courts for administering civil and criminal justice. The civil courts were called the ‘Dharmasthiyas’ and the criminal courts, ‘Kantakasodhanam’.
As the nation progressed many rulers came and ruled India as per their own laws and legal systems. But if we trace back the history to the times of British Raj, it is evident that the most remarkable and efficient contributions to the genre of law, justice and judiciary was made by the English men. The same system is still being followed. Post independence India has been constantly developing and thus many new woes have got introduced. Problems like population explosion, unemployment and coloured growth in society where rich are growing richer and poor even poorer, the number of disputes have increased overwhelmingly. Courts have been flooded with suits and complaints. It is said that justice delayed is justice denied and that is what is happening in many instances. We hear of certain cases where the victim gets justice after he dies.
This is the reason for developing new machinery which could alternatively resolve certain disputes and the place where the concept of Alternative Dispute Resolution comes in. Alternative Dispute Resolution or ADR can be defined as an alternate method for settlement of disputes outside Courts either on being directed by the Court or suo moto by the mutual consent of the parties to a dispute. The major act dealing with ADR in India is the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The central government, in order to reduce delays in various levels has enacted the Civil Procedure Code (Amendment) Act, 1999 under which it is made obligatory to the courts to refer a dispute after issues are framed for settlement by alternative dispute resolution methods.
The major methods forming the part of the Alternative Dispute Resolution System are:

1.    Arbitration:- It is the most widespread and efficient means of ADR. It can be defined as “the hearing and determination of a dispute by an impartial referee agreed to by both parties.” The ‘impartial referee’ referred to hereinabove is called the Arbitrator. There are several ways of appointing an Arbitrator prescribed under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The first and the most common method is mentioning it in the Arbitration Agreement between the parties which is inevitable and has to be signed so as to surrender any dispute to arbitration. Secondly, in absence of any such fixed arbitrator, both the parties select one arbitrator each and they further select one presiding arbitrator. The total number of Arbitrator if opted for more than one should be odd. An order passed by an Arbitrator is referred to as an “Award” and in most of the cases is non revocable, binding, non-appealable and can only be challenged on very limited grounds. There is a great advantage attached to this process, i.e. an expert of that field can be appointed as an Arbitrator to which the dispute pertains. This is the reason why this is widely accepted in the fields of IPR where special knowledge and know how is required.
2.    Conciliation: - In this method the parties choose an independent third party who hears both sides, either privately or together, and then prepares a compromise which the conciliator believes is a fair disposition of the matter. The conciliator's report or conclusions are then put to both sides, who may agree or disagree with it. It is not binding nor is it enforceable unless the parties adopt it.
3.    Mediation: - It is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR), which aims to assist two (or more) disputants in reaching an agreement. The decision as to whether accept or revoke the agreement is taken by the parties themselves rather than accepting something imposed by a third party.
4.    Negotiation :- It is a process by which the involved parties or group resolve matters of dispute by holding discussions and coming to an agreement which can be mutually agreed by them. It also includes negotiation of claims between the parties.

In India, the ADRS also includes tribunals which have quasi judicial authorities to decide cases of certain nature and subject matter like tax, debt recovery, labour and industrial dispute, cyber crime etc. Another latest and most successful type of ADR in India is Lok Adalat System. It is a kind of mock Court organized by the Government authorities usually presided over by retired judges, social activists, or other members of the legal profession. The Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 gave the Lok Adalats a statutory platform by vesting following power in them:-
a.    Every Award passed by a Lok Adalat is to be final, binding and non-appealable.
b.    The members of the Lok Adalats are to be deemed as Publc Servants as under the I.P.C.
c.    Every Lok Adalat is to be deemed to be a civil cour for the purposes of Section 195 and Chapter XXVI of the C.P.C.
d.    All proceedings in front of the Lok Adalat shall be deemed to be judicial proceeding within the meaning of Sections 193, 219, and 228 of the I.P.C.
For referring a dispute to Lok Adalat, there are three methods. Firstly, by consent of both the parties; Secondly, by application of either of them, and Thirdly, by the order of Court. All compromises and settlements are guided by the principles of justice, equity and fair play. Some of the disputes that can be brought to the Lok Adalat include municipal tax cases, insurance claims, motor accident compensation, land acquisition cases, matrimonial disputes and family dispute matters, bank loan cases, dispute related to private parties etc.
Some other methods of ADRS include ombudsmen (in India Lokpal & Lokayukta), med-arb, mini trials, early neutral evaluation, fact finding, case evaluation, private judging etc.
Thus the merits of ADRS over conventional Court system can be traced from the above paragraphs as follows:-
i.    Open and effective communication.
ii.    Flexibility.
iii.    Adaptability.
iv.    Confidentiality.
v.    Constant review and chances for improvement.

But the issue is that the process can only be applied to those disputes which are compoundable in nature or which essentially do not need the accent of a Court. Any issue which is non compoundable or relates to serious matters of rights cannot be referred to ADRS and in such case the Courts of law have to be given recourse and it shall decide accordingly.