The present paper narrates the growing role played by a private arbitration and mediations in resolving business disputes throughout the globe, but a particular focus is put on the dynamic state in India. It talks about the current tendency of privatizing the international business disputes out of the traditional domestic litigation through the different Alternative Dispute Resolution devices. This shift is necessitated by the purported benefits of efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and confidentiality found in the ADR procedures, which is particularly attractive in the context of complex business transactions across borders. As far as these advantages are concerned, these issues are complemented by the combination with digital technologies which provide online dispute resolution platforms which simplify and soften the accessibility. This change towards online dispute resolution particularly applies in India where the number of cases already present in the traditional judicial system was large (over 37 million). This has given rise to judicial overload, in response to which law has legislatively and policy-wise encouraged ADR, such as online mediation, as an option that is both more appealing and nearly more expedient to business. The current paper will critically examine the institutional support of the legal framework and practical implementation of online mediation within a commercial dispute resolution ecosystem, specifically in India.
A significant change in the commercial dispute resolution in the world is the shift of the traditional court-driven litigation to the private commercial dispute resolution mechanisms in the form of arbitration and mediation (Sharma, 2024). The shift in paradigm is especially strong in India, where the adoption of digital technologies is turning these processes into even more effective and affordable ways of finding a solution to a commercial dispute (Bhushan, 2023). This transformation, alternatively called the Cloudroom transformation, uses Online Dispute Resolution services to decongest the high volume of cases in the traditional judiciary system, which is currently battling the over 37 million pending cases (Reddy, 2025). This backlog highlights the essential necessity to find alternative mechanisms that can provide faster and more cost-efficient solutions to businesses (Gupta & Bajpai, 2024) (Mehul, 2025). Furthermore, the expansion of online mediation in India reflects a more significant global tendency of digitalizing justice an offer of a new form of dispute resolution appropriate to the fast process of the digitalization of India (Phuong and Khoe, 2024)(Yadav, 2024). This discussion will also examine the success of online mediation in India, taking into consideration both its potential to enhance the efficiency of dispute resolution and the challenging nature it imposes including technological problems and confidentiality issues (Mehul, 2025). This is also evidenced in the 2021 policy of the Indian government on ODR, which seeks to use technology to improve the availability of justice and provide a more efficient course of handling cases (Yadav, 2023). Nevertheless, even despite these attempts by the government and the presence of the mentioned advantages, the path to fully integrated Online Dispute Resolution in India is still at its initial steps, with the current platforms showing a strong promise of future development and overall adoption (Gupta and Bajpai, 2024).
Modern arbitration and mediation in India have their origins in the form of the 1996 Arbitration and Conciliation Act that established the first all-encompassing legal framework of both private arbitration and mediation having a strong influence on the UNCITRAL Model Law (Yadav, 2019). The purpose of this legislative pillar was to facilitate efficient and efficient resolution of disputes in a heroic manner, and solution to the inefficiencies of the traditional court system (Dhavan, 1987). Since then, this framework has been further refined by subsequent amendments and judicial readings, attempting to make India a leading centre in global arbitration (Navlani & Agarwal, 2013). Despite all these developments, enforcing and judicial intervention problems have witnessed it being faced with some challenges that are hampering its potential (Agarwal, 2006). This situation once again validates the unstable relationship between the judiciary authority and the autonomy of the arbitral processes to affect the perceptions of the efficacy of arbitration (Dhingra, 2020). Through online Dispute Resolution available in India, one can now consider this a fantastic option to jump some of these historical challenges and bring the process of available and faster dispute resolution processes in India. The technological integration is particularly applicable in respect of the fact that queue of cases in traditional courts in India is a long-standing tradition where ODR could appeal more as a commercial entity. The modern legal environment, along with the progress of digital infrastructure, makes ODR a revolutionary phenomenon, able to simplify the procedures of the process of dispute resolution and release the overburdened judicial system (Nema, 2025). Moreover, the recent legislative changes, including Mediation Act of 2023, highlight the progressive trend, making mediation the status equivalent to arbitration, and including pre-litigation, online, and community mediation in the statutory system (Aadya, 2024). The use of online platforms during mediation is formally recognized and promoted in this Act, in line with international tendencies of digital justice (Nema, 2025). Such a legislative development is expected to help India improve its international reputation as an arbitration-friendly destination, passing the old-fashioned statutes that were incomprehensive (Aadya, 2024). Specifically, the Mediation Act, 2023, focuses on simplifying a range of conflicts, such as an insolvency and bankruptcy case, to provide more efficient and cost-effective solutions to such disputes with the help of the Act (Roy, 2024). At the same time, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, this, although going a long way towards improving the arbitration process by restricting the role of the judge, still presents room of improvement especially by ensuring that there is more proactive involvement of arbitral tribunals and institutional arbitration in order to enhance confidence in the process (Kaur, 2010).
The trend toward the use of alternative dispute resolution privately in India is largely driven by the rising cost and extended time particularly involved in the traditional litigation with an increase in the need among businesses and financial institutions having a confidential and movable dispute resolution process (Giacalone, 2025). The exorbitant number of cases that await formal courts, estimated at 40 million, also drives the need to implement ADR systems that offer faster and more efficient solutions (Singh & Chauhan, 2024) . This need has seen the trend of arbitration, mediation, and conciliation increase tremendously especially since the economic liberalization in 1991 that brought about a new twist to commercial disputes (Raju, 2007). In addition, other Indian institutions of problem solving as Lok Adalats, Gram Nyayalayas and Nyaya Panchayats have been very effective in clearing up backlog of cases and offering easily accessible justice at grass root level (Raju, 2007) . These folk systems tend to provide a combination of an informal form of justice with an official body of law, and this evidence shows that alternative methods of resolving disputes were realized in India earlier (Singh and Chauhan, 2024). This historical background brings out the societal tendency to resolve conflicts outside of adversarial approaches, thus enabling the assimilation of contemporary ADR methods (Singh and Chauhan, 2024). True, the mandatory mediation, which is prospectively discussed in Section 89 of the Code of Civil Procedure, is to further unburden the burden on the court by compelling the parties to undertake the possible settlement before turning to the third instance. This requirement highlights that the Indian legal system is proactive to incorporate alternative dispute resolution as a preliminary measure in resolving conflicts, which is also likely to congest courts and allow them to provide efficient services to the global population (GN, 2023) ). The Mediation Act of 2023 also supports this promise, giving the arrangements achieved by the means of mediation a legal basis through which they can be enforced and therefore made more legally predictable and satisfactory to commercial participants. Such legislative support is aimed at increasing the confidence in mediation as a potential alternative to dispute resolution that is viable and legally binding and thereby prevents the already already strained court system from taking a large number of cases (Kumar, 2021)(GN, 2023). It is a complex exercise, which involves changes in legislation, technology integration, and renewal of the traditional system of dispute resolution, proving that India has followed a comprehensive program to streamline its dispute resolution ecosystem (-, 2024)(Singh and Chauhan, 2024). This combined measure is not only intended to help take some of the stress out of the traditional judiciary but also to help put India on the prefered list of commercial institutions both in the country and around the world to find efficient and reliable methods of dispute resolution (Kinhal & Apoorva, 2021)(Raju, 2007). This changing landscape suggests a transition to formalising ADR, the proliferation of past reliance on informal systems of community-based dispute management in India like panchayats and lok adalats, that long performed local dispute management but has long been allowed to serve as pressure on the formal courts (Rautenbach and Somaru, 2021)(Singh and Chauhan, 2024). This old system together with modern arbitral and mediation in the contemporary meaning offers a unique hybrid which only fits the intricacy of the Indian socio-legal setting. This integrative approach is the effort to take advantage of the strengths of both informal and formal mechanisms; and hence to form a more powerful and open justice delivery system.
Nevertheless, there are a number of threats even in the wake of promising development and the growing use of ADR that might hamper its potential and successful application in India. A major obstacle is the ability to guarantee a consistent enforceability of arbitral awards and ratified mediation, which is sometimes lost to judicial review and different interpretations in different jurisdictions (Singh and Chauhan, 2024). Moreover, the absence of a combined system of regulation of the ADR professionals, especially mediators, creates difficulties in terms of the standardized training, ethics and accreditation that might affect the quality and plausibility of the outcomes of the dispute resolution process (Shoukat, 2025). There is also the lack of technological penetration in Indian courts to deploy due process of law, which is another major obstacle to the permeation of automated dispute resolution processes, which otherwise could provide quicker and cheaper dispute resolution (Palanissamy and Kesavamoorthy, 2019). Additionally, the informality of certain ADR mechanisms, as positive in the context of flexibility, may also contribute to challenges with procedural fairness and due process, especially any scenario of disparities in power such as when it comes to maternity benefit claims and employees may be subjects to form of retaliation on the part of employers (Addati et al., n.d.). Such concerns require a multi-faceted solution that will involve legislative change, the growth of ADR professionals and the proactive use of technology to make the process more efficient and more accessible (Dhivya, 2024). In particular, the culture of tolerance towards out-of-court settlements should be encouraged to ensure that the effectiveness of ADR is not impaired by the fact that the traditional attitude toward it is rather intolerant, and there is a need to develop specific strategies in addition to its actual implementation (Albrecht et al., 2011). Such strategies should pay attention to the local power relations that frequently can affect a dispute resolution because of the possibility of the tussle of various classes or economic interests to define the consequences (Albrecht et al., 2011). This is further hampered by the fact that judicial backlog has always been experienced, and in most cases, parties have to engage in lengthy litigation even when ADR avenues are available (Dhavan, 1987). In fact, the number of cases awaiting hearings alone may drive parties to think about ADR, but the lack of effective enforcement tools and practices may to reduce its popularity, especially in contrast to the perceived finality, even though delayed, of court decisions.
The section goes into detail to discuss the impacts of the spread of the use of private arbitration and mediation in India on its reputation in the global business community and both its positive and negative effects. Increased institutionalisation of ADR mechanisms (arbitration and mediation) increases the attractiveness of India as a place to hold foreign direct investment because they provide more predictable and efficient avenues to resolve disputes that are essential in international business (Talib et al., 2024). In addition, the capacity to enforce foreign arbitral awards that is enhanced by adherence to the international conventions by India gives the world entities confidence that their rights in the contracts will be respected. This rising consistency in system of dispute resolution is a critical issue of attraction in multinational corporations where they value timely and fair actions of redressal to protect their investments as well as their trade. This is a surveillance boost of the prestige of the Indian dispute resolution system in the international economy given that an efficient ADR structure may to a large extent curb the perceived risks of cross-border dealings and contracting. Nevertheless, these developments still contain the critics who claim that the privatization of legal jurisprudence as ADR takes away the process of dispute resolution to be examined by the world and the judicial system (Akhtar et al., 2023). Besides, there is the issue of the possibility of power imbalances to play undue influence in the outcomes of the proceedings in a private forum especially where one of the parties possesses major economic or informational edges. It may invite concerns regarding the unfairness and equality of settlements, particularly in contrast to the more open, though slower, procedures of courts in the public (Dongre, 2022). However, the increasing internationalization of trade requires strong and flexible dispute resolution practices, which compel courts such as India to optimize their ADR systems to be competitive and attractive to foreign investors (Bookman and Erie, 2021). This transformation is vital in making Indians become a viable and desirable destination to the global business and especially in an era where the world is moving towards the use of international arbitration to resolve cross-border disputes (Zhang, 2022). The following tendency towards institutionalized ADR does not only simplify international transactions but also requires the ongoing legislative and judicial amendments to coordinate the national practice with the international standards (Goel, 2015).
It is also keen on ensuring effective and internationalized legal system by showing its current practices in developing the landscape of alternative dispute resolution in India, particularly in issues of insolvency across the intercountry boundaries and in intellectual property disputes. This commitment has been observed in the reforms that are currently to be undertaken to align the insolvency laws of India to the international experience and in employing ADR in the process of managing a very complex intellectual property rights cases. All of these are geared towards accomplishing the legal assurance and expediency which plays a significant role in lure foreign investment and ensures that India is well established in the international trade arena. Moreover, the Government of India is in earnest consideration of adoption of UNCITRAL Model Law on Cross-Border Insolvency, and this is a mark of prudence to harmonize the law system with global best practice and a business policy mission to deal with complex transnational insolvency and that of a more foreign-friendly business policy. Such harmonization mechanisms have significance in minimizing risks associated with cross-border operations and maximizing investor trust in this regard taking into consideration the sufferings outlined by instances of economic fluctuations and the dynamics of solving troubled assets. This, not only makes the tasks to be performed by the businesses already at financial strains easy, but, also, this is a sign how India is trying to be a reliable partner in business dealings.
Download
Download XML