Question Description
Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Directions: Read the following passage carefully:Arbitration has been the toast of the legal community for a long time. It has been long expected that arbitration will replace business litigation to a great extent one day. Lawyers have been encouraging parties to have an arbitration agreement in all their business transaction documents for more than two decades now. However, arbitration has not been proven to be effective too often.A lot of lawyers have begun to re-evaluate if they should put in those arbitration clauses blindly in the agreements they draft. Also, a lot of people who have already put in binding arbitration clauses in their agreements, are finding arbitration very difficult to navigate and too expensive when disputes actually arise.Even after 23 years since the introduction of Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, arbitration seems to be slowly evolving and not really making a dent on pendency of litigation situation and more costly unlike litigation. The Act empowers the arbitrator to terminate the proceedings where without any sufficient cause, the claimant fails to communicate his statement of claim within the stipulated period. If the respondent fails to submit his statement of defence within the predetermined period, the arbitrator shall continue with the proceedings without treating such a failure in itself as an admission of claimants allegations.Would it ever become the mature alternative that Indian businesses can safely rely on for reliable, fast, efficient and cost-effective dispute resolution, especially given the terrible state of civil justice?The BN Srikrishna Committee Report on Institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India states that a lack of governmental support to promote arbitration is also one of the reasons why arbitration has not become the most preferred way of resolution. The report goes on to suggest that there should be awareness programmes and training to make arbitration a more popular concept. However, such awareness campaigns are very unlikely to attract parties to arbitration given the way it functions at present.Quality of arbitration and arbitrators can often be suspect. The courts have settled the legal proposition that an arbitration agreement is not required to be in any particular form. Courts in India regularly interfere and do not respect party autonomy. The award is expected to be up for appeal or review in the higher courts and that really does not instill confidence in the parties involved in disputes. These factors are putting off parties from adopting arbitration. At present, it appears that only in a handful of matters involving very large claims, arbitration is still viable in India.[Extracted, with edits and revisions, from why arbitration is not working in India?, article by Livelaw, 7th October, 2019]Q. What does the passage suggest about the state of arbitration in India for matters involving very large claims?a)Arbitration is widely adopted in such cases.b)Arbitration is not considered viable in such cases.c)Courts do not interfere in arbitration for large claims.d)Parties have confidence in the arbitration process for large claims.Correct answer is option 'B'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.