Explain and distinguish between Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals. Whether they entertain civil as well as criminal cases?
Both Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals are alternative dispute resolution (ADR) mechanisms aimed at resolving disputes outside of the traditional court system. However, they differ significantly in their nature, formation, and procedures. Lok Adalats are designed to provide quick, cost-effective solutions to disputes, especially for underprivileged citizens. On the other hand, Arbitration Tribunals focus majorly on commercial and contractual disputes.
Distinction between Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals
|
Aspect
|
Lok Adalats
|
Arbitration Tribunals
|
|
Nature of Disputes
|
Deal primarily with minor civil, family, and petty criminal cases.
For example: Issues related to land disputes and matrimonial cases.
|
Primarily resolve commercial, contractual, and corporate disputes.
For example: Arbitration Tribunals were used in the Vodafone tax case in India.
|
|
Legal Basis
|
Governed by the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 to ensure quick and accessible justice for ordinary citizens.
|
Governed by the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
For example: The Tata-Mistry dispute used Arbitration Tribunals to settle commercial differences.
|
|
Voluntary Nature
|
Participation is voluntary, and both parties must agree to resolve disputes here.
|
Participation is based on an agreement or contract between the disputing parties.
|
|
Appointment of Judges/Arbitrators
|
Chaired by a judicial officer, usually a retired judge or sitting magistrate.
|
Arbitrators are chosen by the parties involved, and they may be legal or non-legal professionals.
For example: In international commercial arbitration cases like Cairn Energy vs the Indian Government, arbitrators were appointed by both parties.
|
|
Cost Efficiency
|
Generally, no court fees are required, making it cost-effective.
|
Involves fees for arbitrators and legal representation, making it more expensive.
|
|
Appeal Process
|
No appeal can be made once a settlement is reached. But they are free to initiate litigation under right to litigate.
|
Awards can be challenged under certain conditions, especially on grounds of bias or procedural issues.
For example: The Antrix-Devas arbitration award was challenged in Indian courts on procedural grounds.
|
|
Role of Lawyers
|
Lawyers are not necessary, but parties can seek legal advice.
For example: In Lok Adalats resolving petty disputes, many parties represent themselves without legal counsel, though they may seek advice from legal professionals.
|
Lawyers or legal professionals are often involved in representing the parties.
For example: In the Reliance vs ONGC arbitration, high-profile legal teams were involved in the case, typical for arbitration disputes.
|
|
Speed of Resolution
|
Disputes are resolved in a single sitting or within a short period.
For example: Over 1.14 crore cases were settled at 3rd National Lok Adalat (2024) organised by NALSA.
|
Arbitration can be a longer process, depending on the complexity of the case.
|
Civil and Criminal Case Jurisdiction
- Lok Adalats: Mainly cater to civil matters and minor criminal cases (compoundable offences).
For example: Cases like cheque bounce or motor accident claims are commonly resolved in Lok Adalats.
- Arbitration Tribunals: Focuses strictly on civil matters, especially commercial disputes.
For example: Arbitration was used in the Ambani family dispute over assets and contracts, which involved civil, commercial issues but no criminal cases.
Both Lok Adalats and Arbitration Tribunals play vital roles in providing alternative legal remedies. While Lok Adalats ensure accessible justice for all, Arbitration Tribunals focus on complex commercial disputes. Both systems aim to reduce the punitive burden of formal courts.
Next
previous
Latest News
General Studies