CBSE Textbook Solutions: Alternative Dispute Resolution in India (ADR) | Legal Studies for Class 12 - Humanities/Arts PDF Download

Based on your understanding, answer the following questions: 

Q1. Ram and Sikander agreed in writing to resolve the disputes arising out of their contract by way of arbitration. A dispute arose between Ram and Sikander. Ram filed a case in the court. Will the court stay the legal proceedings filed by Ram? Discuss. 
Ans: In the case of Ram and Sikander, they have a written agreement to resolve disputes through arbitration. When Ram filed a case in court, the following legal principles apply:
1. Arbitration Agreement Validity: Since Ram and Sikander agreed in writing to resolve disputes via arbitration, this agreement is generally binding under arbitration laws. Courts typically respect such agreements unless there are grounds to invalidate them.
2. Court's Role in Arbitration: When a dispute arises and one party files a case in court despite an arbitration agreement, the other party can request the court to stay the proceedings and refer the matter to arbitration. This is known as a "court referral to arbitration."
3. Likely Court Decision: Given the existence of a valid arbitration agreement, it is likely that the court will stay the legal proceedings initiated by Ram. The court's primary role is to enforce the arbitration agreement and ensure that the parties resolve their disputes as agreed.
4. Exceptions The court may not stay proceedings if:

• The arbitration agreement is found to be invalid or unenforceable.
• There are issues of public policy that necessitate court intervention.

Conclusion
In conclusion, based on the arbitration agreement between Ram and Sikander, it is highly probable that the court will stay the legal proceedings filed by Ram and direct the parties to resolve their dispute through arbitration as initially agreed.

Q2: Mr Hari and his friend, Mr Suresh entered into a partnership deed to carry on the business of creative designing. After a year of starting a successful partnership firm, creative differences arose between Mr Hari and Mr Suresh, which created a rift between them. 49 To help resolve the dispute, Mr Sharma, the secretary of a reputed firm, is facilitating them to help them achieve an acceptable agreement. Which dispute resolution method is Mr Sharma resorting to? Explain.
Ans: Mr. Sharma is resorting to mediation as the dispute resolution method to help Mr. Hari and Mr. Suresh resolve their creative differences. Mediation involves a neutral third party, in this case, Mr. Sharma, who facilitates discussions between the disputing parties to help them reach a mutually acceptable agreement. This method is particularly effective in partnership disputes where maintaining a working relationship is crucial.

• Mediation allows for open communication between the parties.
• It provides a platform for both Mr. Hari and Mr. Suresh to express their concerns and perspectives.
• The goal is to achieve a collaborative solution rather than a win-lose outcome.
• Mediation is generally less formal and can be quicker than litigation.
• It helps preserve the relationship between the partners, which is vital for their business continuity.

In summary, Mr. Sharma's role as a mediator aims to facilitate a resolution that satisfies both parties, thereby promoting a healthier partnership moving forward.

Q3: Sita and Reena are business partners. After sometime a dispute arose between them. Both of them agreed to submit the dispute between them to Mr Bajaj, a senior member of a law firm. Sita subsequently came to know that Reena and Mr Bajaj are related to each other. Can Sita challenge the authority of Mr Bajaj as an arbitrator? Discuss.
Ans: Sita can challenge Mr. Bajaj's authority as an arbitrator based on the principle of impartiality and conflict of interest. Since Sita discovered that Mr. Bajaj is related to Reena, this relationship could potentially bias Mr. Bajaj's judgment, undermining the fairness of the arbitration process. The following points support Sita's position:

• Conflict of Interest: Mr. Bajaj's relationship with Reena may create a perception of bias, which is a valid ground for challenging an arbitrator.
• Right to Fair Hearing: Sita has the right to a fair hearing, which could be compromised if the arbitrator has a personal connection to one party.
• Legal Precedents: Courts often uphold challenges to arbitrators when there is a reasonable apprehension of bias.

In conclusion, Sita has a legitimate basis to challenge Mr. Bajaj's authority as an arbitrator due to the potential conflict of interest arising from his relationship with Reena, ensuring that the arbitration process remains impartial and equitable.

Q4: What is the meaning of Ombudsman? Identify equivalent institutions within India. Discuss their roles and limitations.
Ans: The term Ombudsman originates from the Swedish word "umboosrnaor," meaning "representative." An ombudsman is typically appointed by a legislature, executive, or organization to investigate complaints and resolve them, often through recommendations or mediation. Their role includes identifying systemic issues that lead to poor service or breaches of rights.
Equivalent Institutions in India

• Lokpal: A national ombudsman aimed at addressing corruption among public servants. Established under the Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013.
• Lokayukta: Similar to the Lokpal, but operates at the state level to combat corruption.
• Banking Ombudsman: Appointed by the Reserve Bank of India to address customer complaints regarding banking services under the Banking Ombudsman Scheme, 2006.
• Insurance Ombudsman: Appointed by the Council for Insurance Ombudsman to handle complaints related to insurance services under the Insurance Ombudsman Rules, 2017.

Roles and Limitations
Roles:

• Investigate and resolve complaints from the public.
• Provide recommendations for improving services and addressing grievances.
• Identify and report systemic issues within public and private sectors.

Limitations:

• Recommendations may not always be binding, limiting their effectiveness.
• Scope of authority can vary, with some ombudsmen having limited jurisdiction.
• Dependence on the cooperation of the institutions being investigated.

Q5: A dispute arose between Rakesh and his employer regarding some incident of injustice to Rakesh by some senior members of the management during the course of his employment. They appointed Mr Kumar to resolve the dispute. Mr Kumar not only facilitated the conversation but also suggested potential solutions. Identify and explain the role played by Mr Kumar.
Ans: Mr. Kumar was appointed to resolve the dispute between Rakesh and his employer. His role can be identified as follows:

• Facilitator: Mr. Kumar facilitated the conversation between Rakesh and the employer, ensuring that both parties had the opportunity to express their views and concerns. This role is crucial in mediation as it helps to create a safe environment for dialogue.
• Problem Solver: By suggesting potential solutions, Mr. Kumar acted as a problem solver. He guided the parties towards finding common ground and resolving their issues amicably, which is a key aspect of effective dispute resolution.
• Neutral Third Party: As a neutral party, Mr. Kumar maintained impartiality throughout the process, which is essential for building trust and encouraging open communication between the disputing parties.

In summary, Mr. Kumar's role was pivotal in facilitating dialogue and proposing solutions, thereby aiding in the resolution of the dispute between Rakesh and his employer.

Q6: A Lokpal is an ombudsman in India while a Lokayukta is a similar anti-corruption ombudsman organization in the Indian States. 
(a) Elaborate on the scope of The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013. 
(b) Explain the composition of Lokpal under the Act.
Ans: Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013
The Lokpal and Lokayukta Act, 2013 aims to address corruption in public services by establishing a Lokpal at the national level and Lokayuktas in each state. The Lokpal is empowered to investigate complaints against public servants, including Members of Parliament, and has the authority to recommend the establishment of special courts for corruption cases. This Act mandates that all states must appoint a Lokayukta within one year of its enactment, thereby extending its reach to state-level corruption.
Composition of Lokpal

• The Lokpal consists of a chairperson who is either a former Chief Justice of India or a Supreme Court judge.
• It includes a total of eight members, with at least half being judicial members.
• Members must possess significant expertise in anti-corruption, public administration, or finance.

Q7: The concept of Lok Adalat is an innovative Indian contribution to the global legal jurisprudence. Analyse the features of Lok Adalat that make it a suitable forum for alternative dispute resolution.
Ans: The concept of Lok Adalat, which translates to "People's Court," is a significant innovation in Indian legal jurisprudence, aimed at providing an effective alternative to traditional litigation. Below are the key features that make Lok Adalat a suitable forum for alternative dispute resolution:
1. Accessibility and Affordability: One of the primary advantages of Lok Adalat is that there are no court fees involved. If a case is already filed in a regular court, any fees paid are refunded if the dispute is resolved at the Lok Adalat.
2. Informal and Flexible Procedure: Lok Adalat operates with a less formal approach compared to traditional courts. There is no strict application of procedural laws, allowing disputing parties to interact directly with the judges, which fosters a more open dialogue.
3. Speedy Resolution: Lok Adalats are designed to expedite the resolution process, significantly reducing the time taken to settle disputes compared to regular court proceedings, which can be prolonged due to backlogs.
4. Binding Decisions: The decisions made by Lok Adalat are binding on the parties involved and are enforceable through legal processes, ensuring that resolutions are respected and upheld.
5. Participation and Inclusivity: Lok Adalats encourage the participation of all parties involved in the dispute, which promotes a sense of ownership over the resolution process and outcomes.
6. Focus on Reconciliation: Unlike adversarial court proceedings, Lok Adalat emphasizes reconciliation and amicable settlements, which helps maintain relationships between disputing parties.
7. Jurisdiction: Lok Adalat has the jurisdiction to settle any matter pending before any court, as well as disputes that have not yet been formally instituted in any court of law, covering both civil and compoundable criminal disputes.
8. Community-Based Approach: The institution of Lok Adalat is rooted in the traditional practices of dispute resolution at the grassroots level, such as panchayats, which enhances its acceptance and effectiveness within communities.
Conclusion
Overall, the features of Lok Adalat make it a highly effective forum for alternative dispute resolution, promoting justice in a manner that is accessible, efficient, and community-oriented.