ગુજરાતી
English
Ahmedabad, October 7, 2025
40,455 cases were referred for settlement in the mediation campaign. Of these, 14,888 cases are in the mediation process. 1,972 cases have been settled, the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority announced.
2 million cases in Gujarat
170,963 cases are pending in the Gujarat High Court. A total of 1,690,643 cases are pending in the district and lower courts. 2 million cases are pending in all courts. Of these, 2% were referred to mediation. Due to the absence of judges in 38 consumer courts, 40,000 cases are pending across the state.
Pending cases in the country
10 months ago, there were 82,640 cases pending in the Supreme Court of India. There were 6.18 million, 878 cases pending in the country’s high courts. Ten months ago, there were 46.23 million, 646 cases pending in the country’s district and lower courts.
Reasons
The pending cases are due to a shortage of judges and repeated extensions by lawyers. Ten months ago, 20 out of 52 judge positions in the Gujarat High Court were vacant. 535 out of 1,720 judge positions were vacant in the state’s district and lower courts.
Campaign
From July 1, 2025, to September 30, 2025, courts in Gujarat were working to resolve cases or litigation through independent court mediation for 90 days.
NALSA and MCPC (Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee) launched the 90-day mediation campaign “Mediation for the Nation.”
Efforts were made to resolve cases pending in the state’s Taluka Courts, District Courts, and High Courts through mediation.
Case resolutions were sent from the courts to mediation.
All completed cases, including domestic violence cases, check bounce cases, commercial disputes, employment cases, compoundable criminal cases, consumer disputes, partition claims, land acquisition, and civil claims, were placed under mediation.
This campaign was launched under the guidance of Supreme Court Chief Justice B.R. Gavai and NALSA Executive Chairman Justice Surya Kant, with the aim of expediting the resolution of these cases.
What is the law?
The Mediation Act, 2023, was enacted by Parliament to promote and facilitate mediation, promote institutional mediation, enforce mediated settlement agreements, establish a regulatory body, encourage community mediation, make online mediation acceptable, and make it a cost-effective method.
Sections 8 to 12 of the Act provide for the qualifications and supervision of mediators. The Act allows foreign nationals to be appointed as arbitrators, subject to certain conditions, taking into account their qualifications, experience, and credentials.
Section 18 provides that arbitration proceedings shall be completed within 120 days from the date of the first application, or for an extended period of 180 days with the consent of the parties.
Several recommendations were made in 1988, including the establishment of a Conciliation Court. On April 9, 2005, the then Chief Justice of India, Justice R.C. Lahoti, further promoted arbitration in India by ordering the establishment of the Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC).
A committee was constituted by the Supreme Court to enable implementation. The committee drafted the Model Rules, 2003, which serve as a model for various High Courts to formulate their own arbitration rules.
The Arbitration Act 2023: Specifically, it aims to promote and facilitate institutional arbitration. The Act also provides for cost-effective and timely resolution of disputes through online and community mediation. Furthermore, the Act provides for the enforcement of mediated settlement agreements and the establishment of the Indian Arbitration Council. Mediation, in its original definition, is a process of third-party intervention between two disputing parties with the aim of persuading them to resolve their dispute without resorting to arbitration or litigation. Mediation is not a new process and is also mentioned in Section 89(1) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, which was implemented by the Code of Civil Procedure (Amendment) Act, 1999, and provides for courts to refer parties to mediation, conciliation, judicial settlement, or arbitration for dispute resolution.
Singapore Convention: After signing the Singapore Convention on August 7, 2019, India has made significant efforts to recognize international arbitration as an emerging dispute resolution mechanism. However, ratification of the Singapore Convention by the country is a significant requirement to ensure its implementation. The Arbitration Act is currently silent on the procedure and implementation of international arbitration in India. Therefore, it may see further amendments in the future once India ratifies the Convention.
The Arbitration Act, a precursor to the Arbitration Act, seeks to promote institutional arbitration in India. The Act envisages two types of institutions: Mediation Institutes (MIs) that will train arbitrators and Mediation Service Providers (MSPs) that will provide mediation services to parties seeking arbitration.
Another shortcoming arises regarding arbitration in disputes arising from marital disputes, family disputes, child custody disputes, and property division disputes where one party resides abroad. By limiting the definition of “international arbitration” to commercial disputes only, the Act
excludes many of the above grounds from its scope, potentially preventing such parties from seeking arbitration as a mutually satisfactory process.
Section 28 of the Act: The Arbitration Act, 2023, while being a significant step towards integrating arbitration into the legal system, is not without criticism. Section 28 of the Act allows arbitration agreements to be challenged on specific grounds such as fraud, corruption, misrepresentation, or for disputes falling outside the scope of Section 6, with a possible extension of 90 days. However, these grounds for challenging an agreement are restrictive and do not cover issues such as coercion, duress, or the discovery of fraud beyond the limitation period.
Promoting a Culture of Cooperation and Collaboration: Nevertheless, the Arbitration Act, 2023 is a revolutionary change in the field of dispute resolution. By establishing clear standards, enhancing confidentiality, providing incentives, and ensuring enforcement, the Act significantly reshapes the arbitration landscape. It promotes arbitration as the primary means of resolving disputes, aiming to foster a culture of cooperation and collaboration among conflicting parties while streamlining legal processes. This Act is an important step towards a more efficient, effective, and harmonious approach to dispute resolution.
Legal Recognition of Online Arbitration: The pandemic has firmly established the role of technology in the justice delivery system. The Indian judicial system has significantly embraced technology and has decided to continue hybrid hearings even after the pandemic. Arbitration technology is considered adaptable, especially due to the reduction in formalities and paperwork involved. The Act provides statutory recognition to online arbitration in Chapter VII, but makes it mandatory to obtain the written consent of the parties for online arbitration. Emphasis is placed on maintaining the confidentiality and integrity of proceedings and communications conducted through online mediation.
The Act’s First Schedule, which exempts certain disputes from mediation, is also a problematic area, as many of the disputes listed there are eligible for mediation, and imposing a statutory ban on mediation in these disputes is pointless. The Act’s applicability should not be unnecessarily limited and should cover a wide range of disputes. The time limit for completion of mediation under Section 18 was introduced with the aim of expeditious and efficient dispute resolution. However, it could be argued that since mediation is a completely consensual process that gives one or both parties the full right to withdraw from mediation, imposing a time limit for completion would restrict the parties’ freedom to continue the process if they deem it necessary.
Awareness Raising Efforts – Although mediation is faster, more cost-effective, and offers greater possibilities for maintaining relationships between disputing parties, the current mediation framework in India does not allow it to fully realize its potential. Despite efforts to raise awareness about mediation and include it in legal education curricula, the general public remains largely unaware of mediation. Even where parties are aware of mediation, a major challenge is the lack of incentive to pursue it. In India, there are many myths surrounding mediation, making it difficult for lawyers and their clients to consider it a viable method of dispute resolution. (Google translation from Gujarati)
