ONLINE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

A.           INTRODUCTION

Today people are witnessing the impact of Information and Communication Technology ("ICT") on the legal arena of globe. Technological revolution has altered the scale according to which human affairs are being conducted and has fostered a new medium (the internet) that has impacted well-established legal conceptions especially with respect to resolution.

Justice delayed is justice denied is a legal maxim which means if justice is not administered in time then it is effectively equal to no redress at all. Indian Judiciary is facing a crisis of increasing and pending litigation. Delay in justice and the high cost of litigation have resulted in loss of faith of people in Indian judicial system. Thus, with advent of Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR") emphasis has been shifted from solving the disputes through court room litigation to ADR.

Development in ICT has resulted into online cross-border interactions and e- commerce activities on large scale leading to e-disputes such as domain name disputes, hacking, privacy invasion, e-stalking, e-purchase and sell of goods etc. which called for dispute resolution mechanism to resolve the same.

B.            MEANING

Online DISPUTE RESOLUTION ("ODR") is basically employing of available ICT to deliver ADR services and its implementation of ADR in an online environment. Basically its the utilization of internet and other electronic means as a more efficient medium for parties to resolve their disputes through a variety of ADR methods.

The assistance of ICT is the fourth party in ODR, i.e. in addition to the two disputing parties and third neutral party (arbitrator, mediator, negotiator), there is a fourth party, which is technology. As a matter of fact, the fourth party is used by third party as a tool for assisting the process. ODR resolves e-disputes as well as traditional disputes which are capable of being resolved by information technology in minimal time and cost.

C.            ORIGIN AND EVALUATION

Even though the Internet has its origins much earlier, the need for ODR did not emerge until early 1990s since online commercial activity began only in early 1990's. When online business began, there was an eruption of online disputes. Further, there were no organized dispute resolution institutions devoted to ODR. The need for ODR for growing number of disputes arising from online commercial activities prompted the National Center for Automated Information Research to sponsor a conference on ODR in 1996 leading to funding of three experimental ODR projects.

1.            The Virtual Magistrate project to resolve disputes between Internet Service Providers and users

2.            The University of Massachusetts Online Ombuds Office stressed upon the Internet disputes generally

3.            The University of Maryland looked into resolving proposed family disputes through ODR

Since 1999, many ODR service providers such as Modria, Cybersettle, ClickNsettle.com, SmartSettle, Legal Referee, BBB Online have been resolving disputes both in public and private domain. In India, organizations such as Perry4Law, NIXI (.IN domain), TLCEODRI have also been advocating and taking initiative for ODR in India.

D.           APPLICABLE LAW

1.            INTERNATIONAL LAW

The international arbitration law, is governed by European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration 1961[1], Inter-American Convention on International Commercial 1975[2] supplemented by Inter-American Convention on Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards 1979[3], EU Directive on electronic commerce[4], New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards, 1958 and  UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration and Conciliation Rules.

2.            DOMESTIC LAW

There have been various laws enacted to promote arbitration in India such as Madras Presidency Regulation Act, Bombay Presidency Regulation Act, and The Charter Act 1933 and the Indian Arbitration Act 1940. However, these dealt with mainly domestic arbitration. Some of the applicable laws in India for ADR / ODR are discussed.

(a)         The Constitution of India

The Constitution of India ("COI") was adopted on November 26, 1949 and came into force on January 26, 1950. Article 21 of the  COI declares that no person shall be deprived of his life or his personal liberty except according to procedure established by law. The Supreme Court of India has held that the procedure must be “reasonable, fair and just"[5] and that right to speedy trial is part and parcel of right to life or personal liberty[6].

(b)         The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

By inserting Section 89 (Settlement of Dispute outside Court)[7] and Rules 1A to 1C, Order10 (Direction of Court to opt for any one mode of ADR after first hearing of suit) in the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 vide the Civil Procedure Code Amendment Act 1999, the Courts have been given the power to refer the disputes to:

(i)           Arbitration

(ii)         Conciliation

(iii)       Judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat

(iv)        Mediation.

The Court will endeavour in case of such disputes to formulate the terms of settlement between the parties and will also effect a compromise as per the prescribed procedure.

(c)          Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

The Arbitration And Conciliation Act, 1996 ("Arbitration Act") has been enacted on basis of UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 1985 and Conciliation Rules, 1980. The purpose was to bring uniformity in the arbitration laws around the world and to have its acceptance worldwide. The Arbitration Act, encourages settlement of dispute amicably via Arbitration, Mediation and Conciliation at domestic and international level. Further, if any settlement agreement is arrived at between parties as a result of proceedings under the Arbitration Act, section 73[8] of the Arbitration Act, provides such settlement agreement the status of court judgment.  The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015, has amended section 7[9] of the Arbitration Act to recognise Arbitration Agreement entered into by communication through electronic means, which in a way promotes ODR in effective manner.

(d)         Information and Technology Act, 2000

With the advent of digital signature, there is certainty to online contracts and thus facilitating e-commerce[10]. This was facilitated by the adoption of the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce[11] in 1996. Pursuant to the same, the UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Signatures 2001 was adopted. Based on these UNICTRAL Models, the Information and Technology Act, 2000[12]  ("IT Act") was enacted in India to facilitate e-commerce giving legal recognition to e-transactions. Section 4[13], 5[14], 10-A[15] and other provisions of the IT Act reflects the legal recognition to electronic records and signature.

(e)         Indian Evidence Act, 1872

Pursuant to the enactment of the IT Act, Section 65-A[16] and 65-B[17] were inserted in the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, which has made electronic evidence as secondary copy to be admissible in courts of law. The purpose of Section 65B is to enable “Any Contractually Capable person who knows how to view (or hear) an electronic document to present a copy (printed or on an electronic media) which can be admitted in the Court as also a “document” “without further proof or production of the original”.

E.            STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES

1.            STRENGTHS

Some of the advantages ODR has over traditional courts system and ADR are as:

(a)         Time and Cost Management

ODR obviates the need for travelling and physical meetings, which substantially reduces cost. Thus, allowing for better time and cost management, greater flexibility in procedure and more creative solutions.

(b)         Flexible and Informal

ODR promotes speedy resolution in flexible and informal manner

(c)          Trust and Confidence

ODR enhances trust and confidence in e-commerce environment due to its speedy access to justice, flexibility, time and cost management which promotes e-commerce and overcomes geographical barriers.

(d)         Asynchronous communication

The asynchronous Internet communications have advantage of being edited in contrast to impulsive responses that often can take place in real time face-to-face ADR discussions. Thus it enables proper and clear communication

(e)         Easy to Access

ODR can be accessed anywhere at any time wherever internet is available as per the convenience and necessity of parties.

(f)           Data Storage

Document storage being one of the most usual problems faced in Indian courts has got replaced by ODR mechanism where data storage is secured for saving and transmitting documents as and when necessary without any hassle.

2.            CHALLENGES

Some of the challenges in the growth of ODR in India are lack of human interaction and communication, lack of literacy, inadequate confidentiality and secrecy of proceedings, lack of trust and confidence, limited range of disputes, cultural, educational and language barriers, negative mindset of lawyers. The most crucial challenges of ODR are discussed>

(a)         Challenges as To Admissibility

(i)           Mutual Consent and Writing

To commence the ODR process, there has to be mutual consent of parties, whether by an explicit clause in contract or a separate mutual agreement between parties. If this consent is not  there, any decision rendered by neutral party shall not be legally valid and binding on the parties. Another essential condition is agreement cannot be implied but expressed in writing. The same has been contemplated in Article 2[18] of New York Convention and Article 7[19] of UNCITRAL Model Law. But at the same time New York Convention is silent upon agreements entered into through electronic communications. Whereas UNCITRAL Model law recognizes the arbitration agreements entered into by electronic communications and the same has been followed by India its 2015 Amendment to the Arbitration Act.

(ii)         Place of Proceeding

In the dispute settlement mechanism, the seat and place of arbitration is geographically determined which constitutes the main element on which numerous legal implications depend. If proceedings are conducted entirely online with parties and neutral in distinct places, prima facie, it seems practically not possible to determine place of proceedings. This observation may lead us to understand that virtual arbitration has no situs.

(iii)       Jurisdiction

When disputes are resolved online, question as to applicable substantive law to disputes arises. In case of international arbitration it is important to distinguish four choices of law issues,

(1st)        Substantive law governing merits of parties’ contract and claim

(2nd)      Substantive law governing parties’ arbitration agreement

(3rd)       Law applicable to arbitration proceedings (curial law or lexarbitri)

(4th)       Conflict of law rules applicable to each of forgoing laws.

(iv)       Pre-trial Stage

Important elements of pre-trial stage are discovery, interrogatories and collation of evidence in support respective contentions of parties may be minimized in ODR for speedy resolution leading to failure to discover true and correct state of facts.

(v)              Awards

The New York Convention does not explicitly provide for an arbitral award signed and in writing. However, Article 8[20] of UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce explicitly states that requirement to present information in its original form can be met by an electronic data message. Article 31[21] of UNCITRAL Model Law, requires “award shall be made in writing and shall be signed by arbitrator.” India follows the same principal vide section 31[22] of the Arbitration. But, traditional concept of writing and signature now has been replaced by Information and Technology act, 2000 which has given legal recognition to electronic records and digital signature.

(vi)       Enforcement

The enforcement of the Award is thee pillar upon which edifice of international arbitration rests. The Arbitration Act needs to amended in the following issues

(1st)   How are the adjudicatory process decisions are to be enforced through the courts of law?

(2nd) Are the Orders in execution are subject to appeal under section 34?

(3rd)  The Intervention of court during and after pronouncement of decision.

This will give rise to issues like jurisdictions or law applicable or place of proceedings for which there is need to apply the conflict of rules or proper laws to avoid forum shopping.

F.             Judicial Pronouncement

In domain name related cased such as Tata Sons v. The Advanced Information Technology Association[23] and Maruti Udyog Limited v. Maruti Software Pvt. Ltd[24], WIPO Arbitration and Mediation Center was the ADR entity to resolve the Domain name dispute.

The Supreme Court has held in State of Maharashtra v. Dr. Praful B. Desai[25] that video-conferencing could be resorted to for taking evidence of witnesses. It further stated that such recording of evidence satisfies Section 273[26] of the Code of Criminal Procedure that evidence be recorded in the presence of the accused.

The Supreme Court has recognised the concept of ODR In Trimex International FZE Ltd. v. Vedanta Aluminium Ltd[27], by stating that online arbitration agreement is the most important document of arbitration and since parties do not meet personally but rather virtually. Further the online arbitration agreement must defines all particulars of dispute resolution mechanism. Such agreements must be according to Section 7 of the Arbitration Act.

The Delhi High Court in its order dated August 21, 2012 Shakti Bhog Foods Ltd. vs Kola Shipping Ltd. & Another[28], stated that communication and acceptance by telex, telegram and other mode of communication has been accepted as valid mode of communication.

G.           SUGGESTION AND CONCLUSION

There is an increase and the growth of online market, ODR mechanism in order to fasten its leg needs mass awareness and training. The participation of government plays an important role to assist in creating technical and administrative infrastructure required to set up an ODR process.

The issues as to privacy and confidentiality needs to be tackled to maximize the benefits of new breed of technology led disputes. There is also need for codification of laws, uniform standards and rules including implications of conflict of law rules which will ultimately provide for recognition, admissibility of ODR process nationally as well as internationally.

The necessity is to ensure access to justice at affordable cost to all sections of society. A sound communication infrastructure is necessary for easy access and justice must be delivered in minimal time and in adequate manner by increasing literacy rate, reducing language and cultural barriers, and easy access to e-courts which may put a hand for growth of e-commerce and e- governance. Initiatives at national as well as at international level are to be taken to flourish the wings of ODR thereby reducing burden on judiciary. Thus the step to advance ODR is a key to facilitate global harmony and to encourage international relationship in cross-border disputes.

[1] European Convention on International Commercial Arbitration, United Nations, Treaty Series, vol. 484, No. 7041 (1963-1964) entered into force in 1964

[2] Inter-American Convention on International Commercial Arbitration (Organization of American States, Treaty Series, no. 42) entered into force in 1976

[3] Inter-American Convention on Extraterritorial Validity of Foreign Judgments and Arbitral Awards (Organization of American States, Treaty Series, no. 51) entered into force in 1980

[4] Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce), published in Official Journal of the European Communities dated 17.7.2000, L 178/1

[5] Maneka Gandhi v. U.O.I, AIR 1978 SC 597

[6] Hussainara Khatoon (1) v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar (1980) 1 SCC 81

[7]Settlement of Dispute outside Court

(1)       Where it appears to the Court that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, the Court shall formulate the terms of settlement and give them to the parties for their observations and after receiving the observations of the parties, the Court may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement and refer the same for—

(a)        Arbitration;

(b)       Conciliation;

(c)        Judicial settlement including settlement through Lok Adalat; or

(d)       Mediation.

(2)       Where a dispute has been referred—

(a)        For arbitration or conciliation, the provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (26 of 1996) shall apply as if the proceedings for arbitration or conciliation were referred for settlement under the provisions of that Act;

(b)       To Lok Adalat, the Court shall refer the same to the Lok Adalat in accordance with the provisions of sub-section (1) of section 20 of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) and all other provisions of that Act shall apply in respect of the dispute so referred to the Lok Adalat;

(c)        For judicial settlement, the Court shall refer the same to a suitable institution or person and such institution or person shall be deemed to be a Lok Adalat and all the provisions of the Legal Services Authority Act, 1987 (39 of 1987) shall apply as if the disputes were referred to a Lok Adalat under the provisions of that Act;

(d)       For mediation, the Court shall affect a compromise between the parties and shall follow such procedure as may be prescribed.

[8] Settlement agreement.—

(1)         When it appears to the conciliator that there exist elements of a settlement which may be acceptable to the parties, he shall formulate the terms of a possible settlement and submit them to the parties for their observations. After receiving the observations of the parties, the conciliator may reformulate the terms of a possible settlement in the light of such observations.

(2)         If the parties reach agreement on a settlement of the dispute, they may draw up and sign a written settlement agreement. If requested by the parties, the conciliator may draw up, or assist the parties in drawing up, the settlement agreement.

(3)         When the parties sign the settlement agreement, it shall be final and binding on the parties and persons claiming under them respectively.

(4)         The conciliator shall authenticate the settlement agreement and furnish a copy thereof to each of the parties.

[9] Arbitration agreement. —

(1)         In this Part, “arbitration agreement” means an agreement by the parties to submit to arbitration all or certain disputes which have arisen or which may arise between them in respect of a defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not.

(2)         An arbitration agreement may be in the form of an arbitration clause in a contract or in the form of a separate agreement.

(3)         An arbitration agreement shall be in writing.

(4)         An arbitration agreement is in writing if it is contained in—

(a)         a document signed by the parties;

(b)         an exchange of letters, telex, telegrams or other means of telecommunication which provide a record of the agreement; or

(c)          an exchange of statements of claim and defence in which the existence of the agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by the other.

(5)         The reference in a contract to a document containing an arbitration clause constitutes an arbitration agreement if the contract is in writing and the reference is such as to make that arbitration clause part of the contract.

[10] H. Yu & M. Nasir, “Can Online Arbitration Exist Within the Traditional Arbitration Framework?” (2003) 20 J. Int’l Arb. 455 at 459

[11] The UNCITRAL Model Law on Electronic Commerce was adopted by the General Assembly Resolution 51/162 of 16 December 1996, and amended in 1998

[12] An Act to provide legal recognition for transactions carried out by means of electronic data interchange and other means of electronic communication, commonly referred to as ― electronic commerce‖, which involve the use of alternatives to paper-based methods of communication and storage of information, to facilitate electronic filing of documents with the Government agencies and further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Indian Evidence Act, 1872, the Banker’s Books Evidence Act, 1891 and the Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

[13] Legal recognition of electronic records.—Where any law provides that information or any other matter shall be in writing or in the typewritten or printed form, then, notwithstanding anything contained in such law, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied if such information or matter is– (a) rendered or made available in an electronic form; and (b) accessible so as to be usable for a subsequent reference.

[14] Legal recognition of electronic signatures.—Where any law provides that information or any other matter shall be authenticated by affixing the signature or any document shall be signed or bear the signature of any person, then, notwithstanding anything contained in such law, such requirement shall be deemed to have been satisfied, if such information or matter is authenticated by means of electronic signature affixed in such manner as may be prescribed by the Central Government. Explanation.–For the purposes of this section, ―signed with its grammatical variations and cognate expressions, shall, with reference to a person, mean affixing of his hand written signature or any mark on any document and the expression ―signature shall be construed accordingly.

[15] Validity of contracts formed through electronic means.—Where in a contract formation, the communication of proposals, the acceptance of proposals, the revocation of proposals and acceptances, as the case may be, are expressed in electronic form or by means of an electronic records, such contract shall not be deemed to be unenforceable solely on the ground that such electronic form or means was used for that purpose.

[16] Special provisions as to evidence relating to electronic record.—The contents of electronic records may be proved in accordance with the provisions of section 65B.

[17] Admissibility of electronic records.—

(1)         Notwithstanding anything contained in this Act, any information contained in an electronic record which is printed on a paper, stored, recorded or copied in optical or magnetic media produced by a computer (hereinafter referred to as the computer output) shall be deemed to be also a document, if the conditions mentioned in this section are satisfied in relation to the information and computer in question and shall be admissible in any proceedings, without further proof or production of the original, as evidence of any contents of the original or of any fact stated therein of which direct evidence would be admissible.

(2)         The conditions referred to in sub-section (1) in respect of a computer output shall be the following, namely:—

(a)         the computer output containing the information was produced by the computer during the period over which the computer was used regularly to store or process information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period by the person having lawful control over the use of the computer;

(b)         during the said period, information of the kind contained in the electronic record or of the kind from which the information so contained is derived was regularly fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities;

(c)          throughout the material part of the said period, the computer was operating properly or, if not, then in respect of any period in which it was not operating properly or was out of operation during that part of the period, was not such as to affect the electronic record or the accuracy of its contents; and

(d)         the information contained in the electronic record reproduces or is derived from such information fed into the computer in the ordinary course of the said activities.

(3)         Where over any period, the function of storing or processing information for the purposes of any activities regularly carried on over that period as mentioned in clause (a) of sub-section (2) was regularly performed by computers, whether—

(a)         by a combination of computers operating over that period; or

(b)         by different computers operating in succession over that period; or

(c)          by different combinations of computers operating in succession over that period; or

(d)         in any other manner involving the successive operation over that period, in whatever order, of one or more computers and one or more combinations of computers, all the computers used for that purpose during that period shall be treated for the purposes of this section as constituting a single computer; and references in this section to a computer shall be construed accordingly.

(4)         In any proceedings where it is desired to give a statement in evidence by virtue of this section, a certificate doing any of the following things, that is to say,—

(a)         identifying the electronic record containing the statement and describing the manner in which it was produced

(b)         giving such particulars of any device involved in the production of that electronic record as may be appropriate for the purpose of showing that the electronic record was produced by a computer;

(c)          dealing with any of the matters to which the conditions mentioned in sub-section (2) relate, and purporting to be signed by a person occupying a responsible official position in relation to the operation of the relevant device or the management of the relevant activities (whichever is appropriate) shall be evidence of any matter stated in the certificate; and for the purposes of this sub-section it shall be sufficient for a matter to be stated to the best of the knowledge and belief of the person stating it.

(5)         For the purposes of this section,—

(a)         information shall be taken to be supplied to a computer if it is supplied thereto in any appropriate form and whether it is so supplied directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment;

(b)         whether in the course of activities carried on by any official information is supplied with a view to its being stored or processed for the purposes of those activities by a computer operated otherwise than in the course of those activities, that information, if duly supplied to that computer, shall be taken to be supplied to it in the course of those activities;

(c)          a computer output shall be taken to have been produced by a computer whether it was produced by it directly or (with or without human intervention) by means of any appropriate equipment. Explanation.—For the purposes of this section any reference to information being derived from other information shall be a reference to its being derived therefrom by calculation, comparison or any other process.

[18] 1. Each Contracting State shall recognize an agreement in writing under which the parties undertake to submit to arbitration all or any differences which have arisen or which may arise between them in respect of a defined legal relationship, whether contractual or not, concerning a subject matter capable of settlement by arbitration.

2. The term “agreement in writing” shall include an arbitral clause in a contract or an arbitration agreement, signed by the parties or contained in an exchange of letters or telegrams.

3. The court of a Contracting State, when seized of an action in a matter in respect of which the parties have made an agreement within the meaning of this article, shall, at the request of one of the parties, refer the parties to arbitration, unless it finds that the said agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed.

[19] (1) “Arbitration agreement” is an agreement by the parties to submit to arbitration all or certain disputes which have arisen or which may arise between them in respect of a defi ned legal relationship, whether contractual or not. An arbitration agreement may be in the form of an arbitration clause in a contract or in the form of a separate agreement. (2) The arbitration agreement shall be in writing. (3) An arbitration agreement is in writing if its content is recorded in any form, whether or not the arbitration agreement or contract has been concluded orally, by conduct, or by other means. (4) The requirement that an arbitration agreement be in writing is met by an electronic communication if the information contained therein is accessible so as to be useable for subsequent reference; “electronic communication” means any communication that the parties make by means of data messages; “data message” means information generated, sent, received or stored by electronic, magnetic, optical or similar means, including, but not limited to, electronic data interchange (EDI), electronic mail, telegram, telex or telecopy. (5) Furthermore, an arbitration agreement is in writing if it is contained in an exchange of statements of claim and defence in which the existence of an agreement is alleged by one party and not denied by the other. (6) The reference in a contract to any document containing an arbitration clause constitutes an arbitration agreement in writing, provided that the reference is such as to make that clause part of the contract.

[20] Original

(1)         Where the law requires information to be presented or retained in its original form, that requirement is met by a data message if:

(a)   there exists a reliable assurance as to the integrity of the information from the time when it was first generated in its final form, as a data message or otherwise; and

(b)   where it is required that information be presented, that information is capable of being displayed to the person to whom it is to be presented

(2)         Paragraph (1) applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or whether the law simply provides consequences for the information not being presented or retained in its original form.

(3)         For the purposes of subparagraph (a) of paragraph (1):

(a)   the criteria for assessing integrity shall be whether the information has remained complete and unaltered, apart from the addition of any endorsement and any change which arises in the normal course of communication, storage and display; and

(b)   the standard of reliability required shall be assessed in the light of the purpose for which the information was generated and in the light of all the relevant circumstances.

(4)         The provisions of this article do not apply to the following: [...].

[21] Form and contents of award

(1)         The award shall be made in writing and shall be signed by the arbitrator or arbitrators. In arbitral proceedings with more than one arbitrator, the signatures of the majority of all members of the arbitral tribunal shall suffi ce, provided that the reason for any omitted signature is stated.

(2)         The award shall state the reasons upon which it is based, unless the parties have agreed that no reasons are to be given or the award is an award on agreed terms under article 30.

(3)         The award shall state its date and the place of arbitration as determined in accordance with article 20(1). The award shall be deemed to have been made at that place.

(4)         After the award is made, a copy signed by the arbitrators in accordance with paragraph (1) of this article shall be delivered to each party

[22] Form and contents of arbitral award.—

(1)         An arbitral award shall be made in writing and shall be signed by the members of the arbitral tribunal.

(2)         For the purposes of sub-section (1), in arbitral proceedings with more than one arbitrator, the signatures of the majority of all the members of the arbitral tribunal shall be sufficient so long as the reason for any omitted signature is stated.

(3)         The arbitral award shall state the reasons upon which it is based, unless—

(a)   the parties have agreed that no reasons are to be given, or

(b)   the award is an arbitral award on agreed terms under section 30.

(4)         The arbitral award shall state its date and the place of arbitration as determined in accordance with section 20 and the award shall be deemed to have been made at that place.

(5)         After the arbitral award is made, a signed copy shall be delivered to each party.

(6)         The arbitral tribunal may, at any time during the arbitral proceedings, make an interim arbitral award on any matter with respect to which it may make a final arbitral award.

(7)          (a) Unless otherwise agreed by the parties, where and in so far as an arbitral award is for the payment of money, the arbitral tribunal may include in the sum for which the award is made interest, at such rate as it deems reasonable, on the whole or any part of the money, for the whole or any part of the period between the date on which the cause of action arose and the date on which the award is made.

(b)   A sum directed to be paid by an arbitral award shall, unless the award otherwise directs, carry interest at the rate of eighteen per centum per annum from the date of the award to the date of payment.

(8)         Unless otherwise agreed by the parties,—

(a)         the costs of an arbitration shall be fixed by the arbitral tribunal;

(b)         the arbitral tribunal shall specify—

(i)           the party entitled to costs,

(ii)         the party who shall pay the costs,

(iii)       the amount of costs or method of determining that amount, and

(iv)        the manner in which the costs shall be paid. Explanation.—For the purpose of clause (a), “costs” means reasonable costs relating to—

(i)           the fees and expenses of the arbitrators and witnesses,

(ii)         legal fees and expenses,

(iii)       any administration fees of the institution supervising the arbitration, and

(iv)        any other expenses incurred in connection with the arbitral proceedings and the arbitral award.

[23] Case No. D2000-0049 of WIPO .. 

refer https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0049.html

[24] Case No. D2000-1038 ..

refer https://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-1038.html

[25] (2003) 4 SCC 601

[26] Evidence to be taken in presence of accused. Except as otherwise expressly provided, all evidence taken in the course of the trial or other proceeding shall be taken in the presence of the accused, or, when his personal attendance is dispensed with, in the presence of his pleader.

[27] (2010) 3 SCC 1

[28] O.M.P. 194 of 2009