The rapid addition in trade, commercialism and investing along with turning demand of declarative legal claims has led to streamlining of difference declaration system in developing states throughout the universe. Litigation in many developing states are confronted with legion defects which have resulted in the development of the construct of alternate difference declaration mechanism. With the March of clip, the alternate forum of difference declaration has gained importance and prominence in the universe by authorising the ordinary litigators with promptitude, affordability, impartial determination devising, sensible solutions and efficiency. Arbitration is one of such being one such speedy and efficacious system of alternate difference declaration for making appropriate justness to the parties who are in demand of the same [ 1 ] .
In developing states due to high population, the litigative nature of the person and retardation of engineering and substructure has made judiciary prostration under the force per unit area of big figure of instances pending for disposal. The high cost, un-necessary holds, deficiency of brevity and privateness in the procedure of judicial proceeding have compelled states and individual’s to seek for alternate difference declaration mechanism [ 2 ] . One of the solutions for the addition clogging of the bench is to develop alternate difference declaration mechanism which can be done through the development of Arbitration which is known as private judicial proceeding. So Arbitration may be defined “ A mention of a difference or difference between non less than two parties for finding after hearing both sides in a judicial mode by a individuals or individual other than tribunal of competent legal power”[ 3 ].The rule of Arbitration includes a just declaration of differences by an impartial organic structure without unneeded hold or disbursal and without intervention by the tribunals. Therefore, arbitration which was similar to judicial proceeding in the private sector seemed contributing to supply a support system to the overburdened and inefficient system of adjudication.
India is non new to Arbitration procedure. Start of Arbitration procedure is lost in the mist of clip with no record bespeaking how Arbitration procedure started in India. Nevertheless, the jurisprudence and pattern of private and transactional commercial difference without the tribunal intercession can establish in the haze of Indian history. The Arbitration theoretical account in India is chiefly based around the function of panchayet at grass root degree. The panchayet were known since clip immemorial that made debut to Arbitration and acceptance much easier. The panchayet were group of five aged people who would steer the villagers to settle their difference. In some instances, the panch more resembled a judicial tribunal ; they could step in on the ailment of one party and non needfully on the understanding of both, for illustration in the instance of caste affair. However, in most instances, the arbitrational award was made by an understanding between the parties [ 4 ] .
In the absence of serious defects or misconduct, by and big, the tribunals have given acknowledgment to the awards of the panchayet. For case,Sitanna V Viranna,the Privy Council affirmed an award of the panchayet in a household difference challenged after 42 old ages. These arbitrational organic structures dealt with a assortment of differences, such as differences of contractual, marital and even of a condemnable nature. The Raja was the ultimate arbiter of all differences. However, with alteration in socio-economic conditions of the people with the altering times, the function of such conventional arbitrational organic structures appeared to be unequal and out-dated [ 5 ] .
During Muslim regulation, all Muslims were governed by the Islamic laws- The Sharia is contained in Hedaya. The non- Muslims continued to be governed by their ain personal jurisprudence which has been compendiously collected as Hindu jurisprudence. However, for minutess between Muslims and Non-Muslims a intercrossed system of arbitration jurisprudence developed. The Hedaya contains the commissariats for Arbitration between parties. The pattern of resort to arbitration which evolved up to the terminal of Mughal Empire, continued even during the British period in different parts of the state.
Under the British regulation the East India Company did non alter the jurisprudence associating to arbitration prevalent in the state at the clip, they came into power. But between the old ages 1772 and 1827 the authorities enacted statute law to ordain jurisprudence associating to arbitration by doing ordinances in three Presidency towns- Calcutta [ 6 ] , Bombay [ 7 ] and Madras [ 8 ] , in exercising of the powers given to them by British parliament. These ordinance lacked lucidity and item.
The jurisprudence regulating arbitration in a formal sense was foremost introduced by the British with the creative activity of the Bengal Regulations in 1772. Bengal Regulation 1772 and 1781 made a proviso that parties can mention the difference to the arbiter and such arbiter must be appointed by common understanding between the parties and the award of the arbiter shall amount to decree of a civil tribunal. Madras Regulation IV of 1816 formulated a strategy for working the panchayet system in small towns and to promote small town people to work out their jobs. Bombay Regulation VII of 1827 made a particular proviso for arbitration. It provided for arbitration through their intercession of the tribunal with one rider that suit must non be pending. In the twelvemonth 1859 the Act VII of 1859 was passed and it codified the process of civil tribunal. Provision of chapter VI was incorporated in the Act [ 9 ] .
Prior to 1899 there was no peculiar jurisprudence covering with the arbitration in India. In the twelvemonth 1899, the British enacted the Indian Arbitration Act 1899 which was modelled upon the British Arbitration Act of 1899. Though this was the first substantial piece on statute law on arbitration, in India, its proviso merely affirmed to presidency town Bombay, Calcutta and Tamil Nadus
In the twelvemonth 1908 Civil Procedure Code was enacted and it repealed the earlier codification of 1859. Section 89 and Second Schedule of the codification contained elaborate commissariats of arbitration in regard of the capable affair of the suit through arbitration without tribunal intercession [ 10 ] .
The working of Arbitration Act 1899 presented complex and cumbrous jobs, ad judicial sentiment started voicing its displeasure and dissatisfaction with the predominating province of the arbitration jurisprudence.
The judicial rebuke every bit good as clamor of the commercial community led to the passage of a consolidating and amending statute law. The Arbitration Act 1940 ( Act No 10 of 1940 ) , which consolidated and amended as jurisprudence associating to arbitration as contained in the Indian Arbitration Act, 1899 and the 2nd agenda to the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. It was to a great extent based on the English Arbitration Act of 1934 and came into force on 1stJuly, 1940. It extends to whole of India except Jammu and Kashmir. This Act dealt with loosely three sorts of arbitration: ( I ) arbitration without intercession of a tribunal, ( two ) arbitration with intercession of tribunal where no suit is pending before tribunal, and ( three ) arbitration in suits. It applied to all arbitrations, including statutory arbitrations as per the Arbitration Act 1940 [ 11 ] .
The Arbitration Act, 1940 which was merely applicable to domestic arbitration, required intercession of the tribunal in all the three phases of arbitration, such as, prior to the mention of the difference to the arbitrational court, during the continuation of the proceedings before the arbitrational court, and after the award was passed by the arbitrational court, for guaranting due conformity with the commissariats of Arbitration Act, 1940.
While the 1940 Act was thought to be a nice piece of statute law. But in its existent operation and executing by all the concerned parties, arbiters, attorneies and the tribunals it proved to be uneffective and was loosely understood to hold become out-dated [ 12 ] .
Arbitration proceedings under the 1940 Act has degenerated into a legal morass which left the parties, irrespective of whether they win or lose, impoverished in footings of clip and money. The Supreme Court itself lamented over the province of personal businesss in 1981 by detecting:
“However, the manner in which the proceeding under the Act are conducted and without exclusion challenged in the tribunals has made attorneies laugh philosopher weep. Experience shows and jurisprudence studies bear ample testimony that the proceeding under the act have become proficient accompanied by unending prolixness at every phase supplying a legal trap to the unwary” [ 13 ] .
The globalization of trade and commercialism and the necessity for effectual execution of economic reforms necessitated re-drafting of the Indian Arbitration Act of 1940 with a position to guaranting smooth and prompt colony of domestic every bit good as international commercial differences. The jurisprudence committee of India, in its 76Thursdaystudy in November, 1978 had already recommended for updating the Arbitration Act of 1940 to run into the challenges of a modern developing state like India. Besides, several other representative organic structures of trade and commercialism including legal experts had besides given valuable proposals for important alterations in the organic structure of bing arbitration jurisprudence of India which were beset with several lacks and blanks. As a consequence of these demands, the Arbitration and Conciliation Bill, 1996 was promulgated through regulation by the President of India and as the parliament could non go through the said Bill within the stipulated clip, the regulation had to be promulgated twice until it was passed and it got concluding acquiescence of the President of India on 16ThursdayAugust, 1996. The Act came to be known as the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996 and was effectual from 25ThursdayJanuary, 1996 [ 14 ] .
THE ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996: –
Before the passage of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 the jurisprudence on arbitration in India was well contained in three passages, viz. the Arbitration Act, 1940, the Arbitration ( protocol and convention ) Act, 1937 and the Foreign Awards Act 1961. In the statement of objects and grounds appended to the Bill it was stated that the Arbitration Act, 1940 which contained the general jurisprudence on Arbitration, had become out-dated. The said objects and reason’s stated that the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law ( UNCITRAL ) adopted in 1985 Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. The General Assembly recommended that all the states should give due consideration to the said Model Law which along with the regulations, was stated to hold harmonized constructs on Arbitration and Conciliation of different legal systems of the universe and contained provision’s which had cosmopolitan application’s.
The above statement of objects and grounds besides states that though the said UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules are intended to cover with international commercial arbitration and conciliation they could with appropriate alterations serve as a Model Law for passages associating to domestic arbitration and conciliation. The present measure seeks to consolidate and amend the jurisprudence associating to domestic arbitration, international commercial arbitration, enforcement of foreign awards and to specify jurisprudence associating to conciliation, taking into history the said UNCITRAL Model Law and Rules [ 15 ] .
Outstanding Features of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996[ 16 ] :
- A Comprehensive Statute- The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which is chiefly based on the UNCITRAL Model Law associating to international commercial arbitrations is a comprehensive statue associating to arbitration jurisprudence in India, since it covers all the relevant commissariats associating to domestic, international and interstate arbitration’s as per the said UNITRAL Model Law. The act besides recognises Conciliation as a agency of colony of commercial differences along with Arbitration. The act is more comprehensive that the Arbitration Act, 1940 because the Arbitration Act, 1996 contains commissariats associating to both domestic and international Arbitration, while the Arbitration Act, 1940 contains commissariats merely to domestic arbitrations.
- An Explanatory Code- The Arbitration Act, 1996 is an explanatory and complete codification in itself, as it contains necessary commissariats associating to both domestic and international arbitration and besides for the first clip confers the position of court to the arbiters, which is a important over the old Arbitration Act, 1940.
- Curtailment of the Court Powers- The Act of 1940 allowed the Civil Courts to step in in the arbitrational proceedings affair. As a consequence of such intervention the arbitrational court could non work efficaciously. The Act of 1996 has limited the powers of the tribunal and restricted the exercising of judicial power. As provided under Sec 5 of Act, “Notwithstanding anything contained in any jurisprudence for the clip being in force, in affairs governed by this portion, no judicial authorization shall step in except where so provided in this part.” Further, Sec 35 of the Act states that topic to this portion, the arbitrational award will be concluding and adhering upon the parties. Sec 36 provides for enforcement of award without intercession of the tribunal.
- Procedure for behavior of Arbitration and Awards in detail- Chapter V of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 provides for elaborate process and pattern for behavior of arbitration and rendition of Arbitration awards.
- Precised power of the court- The Act of 1996 has curtailed the powers of the tribunal by taking aid merely in peculiar affairs. The Court’s support could be looked in taking grounds merely with anterior blessing of the arbitration court, as per Section 27 ( 1 ) of the Act. In affair of legal power as per Section 42 of the 1996 Act provinces that “where with regard to an arbitration understanding any application has been presented in a tribunal, that peculiar tribunal will entirely hold legal power over arbitrational proceedings” .
- Power of arbiters Enhanced- A comparing of the proviso of the Arbitration Act, 1996 with that of the Arbitration Act, 1940 goes to bespeak that the new Act has increased the powers of arbiters in regard of legal power of Arbitration Tribunals and besides competence of the arbiters to govern.
- A new signifier of Conciliation- Part III of the 1996 Act trades with internationalised conciliation attack and clarifies the application and range of conciliation for effectual declaration of commercial difference. Section 63 of the Act specifies the figure of make-peaces to be appointed by the parties to the understanding.
- International Applicability- The old Arbitration Act of 1940, had no proviso for interim awards to be made by a foreign tribunal, but the new Act of 1996, has proviso for pertinence of Foreign Arbitral Tribunals Awards.
The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 which replaced the old 1940 Act, was passed with a position to supply an efficient and expeditious difference declaration system, which would instil assurance in the heads of the foreign investors in the dependability and effectivity of the Indian difference declaration system, every bit good as for pulling foreign investings in India.
The Arbitration Act, 1996 which has been enacted as per the UNCITRAL Model Law, has even surpassed the range and bounds of the said Model Law in certain respects. First, while the UNICITRAL Model Law merely applies to international Commercial arbitrations [ 17 ] , the Arbitration Act, 1996 applies both to international and domestic arbitrations. Second, the 1996 Act goes beyond the UNICITRAL Model Law in the country of minimising judicial intercession [ 18 ] .
The alterations which were brought by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Indian arbitration system which were prevailing under the 1940 arbitration act, was done in a really headlong and speedy manner, without resort to a wise argument sing the alterations to be brought by the 1996 act every bit good as without any appropriate apprehension of the legislative alterations enunciated by the said act [ 19 ] .
The Law Commission of India in its 176Thursdaystudy submitted to the authorities of India had given a figure of utile recommendations for conveying coveted alterations in the Arbitration Act, 1996, so as to make off with the lacks and blanks of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which has been experienced during the working of the said Act. In response to the recommendations of the Law Commission, the Government of India introduced the Arbitration and Conciliation ( Amendment ) Bill, 2003, in Parliament for amending the 1996 Act. The said Bill has non yet matured into statute law, as during the said period the authorities of India, the Ministry of Law and Justice, appointed a Committee popularly known as the ‘Justice Saraf Committee on Arbitration’ , to analyze in deepness the deductions of the recommendations of the Law Commission of India contained in its 176th Report and the Arbitration and Conciliation ( Amendment ) Bill, 2003. The Committee submitted its study in January 2005.
1 | Page