Abstract
The judicial system of India is burdened by an extreme number of pending cases; there are around one hundred eighty-two thousand (182,000) cases pending for over 30 years.[1]
This traditional legal framework, burdened by the pendency of cases, is witnessing the rise of an alternate pathway, which is more cost-effective and faster. Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), which is a merger of technology and Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). This research paper explores the growth of ODR in India, the legal and institutional frameworks that support it, and the role of the judiciary and private technology players in shaping its future. The paper showcases the benefits of ODR, some of the challenges and legal risks involved in ODR, and proposes future actions for inclusive digital justice. With greater government support, judicial support, and developing private adaptation, ODR may provide enhanced efficiency, equality, and access to a dispute resolution ecosystem in India.
Keywords
Online Dispute Resolution, Digital Justice, Access to Justice, Indian Legal System, Technology and Law, Alternative Dispute Resolution
Introduction
The tend of going into litigation is on the rise and increasing day by day, according to data of National Judicial Data Grid a database of department of justice the pendency of cases has been increased between December 2019 to April 2024 over 27%.[2] People go to court because seeking justice is their fundamental right given to them by the constitution of India yet there are millions of people for whom this system is slow and expensive. According to India Justice Report 2025 there is one High court judge for every 18.7 lakh people highlighting the current need for innovative and scalable solutions to reduce the burden on the judiciary system and ensure it is more effective and efficient.[3] In this context, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) has come to the forefront as an efficient way to resolve disputes using digital platforms.
The National Center for State Courts defines court as “a public-facing digital space in which parties can convene to resolve their dispute or case.”[4]
Methods of research
In order to track the evolution, performance, and difficulties of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) procedures in India, this research study uses a qualitative doctrinal methodology and entails a critical analysis of main and secondary legal documents and sources. The study employs an exploratory and analytical methodology to comprehend how ODR evolved as a digital justice mechanism within the Indian court system. The study will integrate theoretical law with the real-world development of arbitration procedures, and it will employ a descriptive-analytical approach. To better understand the evolution of ODR in the Indian jurisdiction, it is going to use comparative technique when utilizing data from worldwide ODR models.
Review of Literature
The Government of India’s official paper, NITI Aayog’s ODR Handbook (2021), explores the applicability and extent of ODR in India.[5] It analyzes the problems with India’s legal system and points to ODR as a means to increase efficiency and accessibility.
- (2020–2022) Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy Reports: These publications address legislative frameworks relevant to the digitization of justice and work through the policy recommendations. The significance of building confidence on digital platforms and implementing procedural protections are especially mentioned in these publications.
- In her article “Online Dispute Resolution – The Promise and Potential for India” (2021), Shalini Seetharam outlines the actions that India needs to take to provide the prerequisites for ODR procedures to be successful and functional. According to market forecasts, ODR will soon succeed both institutionally and legally, particularly in consumer and business disputes.
- The “implementation of ODR in the Indian courts” is covered in the Sama Legal-Tech White Papers, which also detail the effective usage of ODR for insurance, MSME, and banking issues throughout the nation during COVID-19.[6]
- International Journal Articles: Harvard Negotiation Law Review, for example To evaluate how other nations—mostly Singapore and the UK—are reacting to ODR and where India fits in, comparative reflections have been conducted.[7]
Origin of ODR
The idea of online dispute resolution, or ODR, first surfaced in the 1990s when the internet made it possible for businesses to conduct previously unheard-of online transactions.[8] The shift away from in-person to online interactions resulted in more people or organizations getting embroiled in conflicts that might not have arisen without the internet. Conventional onsite conflict resolution procedures were expensive, time-consuming, laborious, and location-specific. ODR emerged in response to the growing need for electronic dispute resolution with online organizations and individuals employing faster, less expensive electronic methods, particularly online arbitration, chat negotiation, videoconferencing apps, and email. ODR, or alternative dispute resolution, is a more technologically sophisticated version of traditional ADR.
- Development of ODR on a Worldwide Basis
There have been three major stages in the historical evolution of ODR on a global scale.
The first phase began in 1996 with a number of studies at the University of Maryland and the University of Massachusetts to see if conflicts might be settled online. Then, in 1999, eBay launched a pilot program that gave customers the option to arbitrate and mediate online conflicts. The fact that this service settled a lot of low-value disagreements between buyers and sellers made it very effective. By 2010, eBay has reached a significant milestone in the history of online dispute resolution, handling over 60 million disputes annually through its ODR platform.[9]
The second stage saw the emergence and growth of private ODR platforms in the late 1990s. At the start of the new millennium, dozens of ODR startups emerged as a result of eBay’s success. There were more than twenty-one new ODR programs in 1999 alone. The majority failed, however platforms like Cybersettle, Smartsettle, and The Mediation Room succeeded by incorporating innovative online negotiation and blind bidding techniques that made ODR applicable to sectors other than e-commerce, like banking and insurance.
Following the institutional adoption of ODR by governments and courts worldwide, the third step signified the legal recognition of ODR. In order to save litigation costs, provide justice quickly, and facilitate accessibility, nations began integrating ODR into their established legal processes. For instance, Singapore’s Small Claims Tribunal offered a fully online platform that allowed citizens to make claims, negotiate, and settle conflicts without physically appearing in court. In 2016, the UK launched the Online Civil Money Claims service for claims under a certain threshold value, and the European Union started the cross-border ODR process for consumer disputes. enforcing justice worldwide.These incidents show how ODR is becoming more widely recognized as a valid and efficient component of the global justice delivery process.
- India’s ODR trek
Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in India began as a component of the country’s broader adoption of ADR, particularly with the enactment of the 1996 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, which was impacted by the UNCITRAL Model Law[10] and Conciliation Rules. India’s acceptance of digital disruptions in dispute resolution was made possible by the legal framework.
Online dispute settlement for domain name disputes was made possible with the introduction of the IN Domain name dispute resolution policy (INDRP) in 2006. The 10th International Forum on ODR was held in Chennai in 2011, demonstrating the interest in the subject.[11] Initiatives like the SAMADHAAN platform for MSMEs, the Vivaad se Vishwas scheme for tax disputes, and the NITI Aayog with its committee led by Justice A.K. Sikri to mainstream ODR boosted the ODR ecosystem between 2017 and 2020.[12] A parliamentary committee and the Vidhi Center both suggested a digitally integrated approach to dispute resolution, and states such as Chhattisgarh conducted virtual Lok Adalats.
- The COVID-19 pandemic and ODR
The COVID-19 pandemic in 2020 made ODR much more important in India. Lockdown regulations and other disturbances caused courts to close or be severely constrained. As a result, with courts closing, online conflict resolution became essential. Lending, employment, and commerce industry disputes were among the sectors that were frequently impacted by the shutdowns; using ODR, we can continue to provide access to justice despite hardship. ODR is a viable and affordable means of resolving disputes that advances the goal of Digital India by ensuring that everyone has access to the legal system.
Government and Judicial Support
The COVID-19 pandemic led both arms of the government (judicial and executive) to explore and embrace technology with increased vigor. Virtual hearings, e-filling, and electronic case management systems were all in development allowing ODR to be mainstreamed. The ODR Handbook (2021) produced by NITI AAYOG, and the Supreme Court of India being progressive with regard to digital infrastructure are positive developments.[13]
India’s Institutional and Legal Foundation for ODR
India’s ODR system integrates technology-based justice initiatives with its current legal structure. The following are the primary tenets of India’s ODR framework:
1. Section 89 of the 1908 Code of Civil Procedure
Courts are encouraged by Section 89 to submit cases to alternative dispute resolution (ADR) processes like conciliation, mediation, and arbitration.[14] The Supreme Court of India used the concept from Section 89 in Salem Bar Association v. Union of India (2015) and suggested merging ADR with electronic means, which subtly endorsed the approval of ODR with virtual adjudication.[15]
2. Sections 30 and 43 of the 1996 Arbitration and Conciliation Act[16]
Agreements to mediate disputes are supported by Section 30, which permits conflict resolution even in cases where arbitration is used (including pre-arbitration settlements). Agreements that submit conflicts to organizations specified by the law are held accountable under Section 43; several of these organizations currently offer online forums for arbitration. Once more, these clauses permit the verification of completely functional online settlements.
3. The 2000 Information Technology Act
Contracts or documents using electronic signatures are legally equivalent to those governed by the IT Act. Sections 5–13 and 68 of the IT Act contain requirements that, at the very least, enable electronic communications. As a result, settlements reached through ODR may be regarded as legally binding.[17]
4. The Samadhaan Portal and the MSME Development Act
Conciliation is supported by the MSME Act in order to settle payment disputes. The conciliation procedure is used by the government’s Samadhaan portal,[18] which was introduced in 2018, to give SMEs a platform to submit a submission alleging a payment delay. This makes the process digital and, if necessary, legally enforceable.
5. Empowering Technology: Supreme Court of India v. Swapnil Tripathi (2018)
The Supreme Court ruled in this case that “Sunlight is the best disinfectant” and that the public’s access to live-streamed public interest procedures (constitutional cases) demonstrates the institution’s transparency.[19] The courts were instructed by Justice D.Y. Chandrachud to revise the regulations governing this transition found in Article 145(4).
6. Virtual Lok Adalats, e-Courts, and technology
NICNET Project: To computerize all High Courts, the NICNET project got underway in the 1990s. E-filing, or the digital administration of case files, has also been a focus of the e-Courts project, especially in commercial divisions.
e-Lok Adalats: To resolve conflicts online during the COVID pandemic, Chhattisgarh and numerous other states held virtual Lok Adalats. The proceedings were legitimate since they met the requirements for a procedure specified in the Legal Services Authorities Act of 1987.
ODR implementation challenges include:
1. The digital divide and internet accessibility
ODR cannot function properly without digital infrastructure and internet access. There are now major disparities in India with regard to this service’s accessibility.[20] In India, there were over 743 million internet users as of early 2020; however, access is only about 32% in rural areas and over 99% in metropolitan areas. Nearly 70% of rural homes lack adequate connectivity, according to studies. It is crucial to keep in mind that socioeconomic disparities are present in addition to a lack of connectivity in some places; for instance, women and underprivileged caste groups have less access to the internet than other groups.ODR will only provide connectivity opportunities to the urban population; it will not be a universal opportunity unless infrastructure and skill gaps in the population are addressed through initiatives like PMGDISHA and BharatNet.
2. Uncertainty in Law and Policy
ODR is currently not clearly governed by Indian law, which leaves room for ambiguity regarding its implementation and procedure.[21] There are many unresolved issues regarding the integrity of online awards, cross-border enforceability, jurisdiction, and consumer protection in these systems, even though the prior legal framework—which includes the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Section 89 of the CPC, and the Information Technology Act, 2000—provides some support for electronic settlements as a form of reference. An inadequate commitment to upholding and enforcing agreements they enter into is demonstrated by the lack of official accreditation systems for ODR providers, as well as the absence of even a minimal set of procedural norms, privacy protections, and e-notarization requirements.
3. Awareness and Trust
The trust that consumers, companies, and attorneys have in ODR as trustworthy, equitable, and private will be crucial to its success. Relatively little public trust exists since businesses, customers, and attorneys still choose traditional court proceedings, and people and students frequently view online processes as informal or unreliable.[22] Since ODR is new, the legal profession is not very aware of it and is skeptical of it, which prevents it from being adopted more quickly.ODR is frequently seen as insecure; several experts express worries about data security, the absence of face-to-face communication, and the unpredictability of digital signatures, which are greater obstacles for others. Targeted outreach (e.g. training, awareness campaigns, sample ODR experiments, and adhering to openness and privacy requirements) may be one strategy to involve consumers, businesses, and attorneys in online ODR.
Suggestions
Although online dispute resolution (ODR) offers a fantastic chance to significantly alter India’s legal system, a number of pressing issues pertaining to infrastructure, policy, and awareness were found. The following suggestions are offered in light of this paper’s findings:
- Recognition and Use of Legislation
To acknowledge mechanisms for ODR, it is imperative that both substantive and procedural laws be changed. To acknowledge fully digital dispute resolution procedures and grant them the proper prima facie legal validity, provisions in the Rules of Civil Procedure, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, and numerous other laws must be changed.
- Creation of Digital Infrastructure
Only with a robust digital infrastructure can ODR be operationalized. ODR will be especially crucial for connecting those living in rural and semi-urban areas. To enable those who lack experience with accessing ODR, the government must make sure that crucial digital networks designed for connectivity, such as BharatNet, are integrated with the legal aid programs if it hopes to advance an ODR policy.
- Incorporation into the Legal Education and Training Process
All law students, judicial officers, and attorneys must receive training on using ODR tools and platforms as part of their general education. These topics might soon be covered in law school curricula if exposure to legal technology and digital justice is to help law students. In order to receive full membership in the Law Society, attorneys must also include ODR in their continuing legal education (CLE) module.
- Participation and Participation
Making ODR accessible is not enough; courts, bar councils, and technology providers should think about creating uniform rules, conduct codes, and forms for ODR-related concurrent proceedings through cooperative engagement that streamlines ODR procedures.
Conclusion
A judicial revolution is about to occur in India. Online Dispute Resolution, or ODR, offers a quick and scalable solution to the special problems brought on by a backlog of cases, financial constraints, and restricted access, as well as a completely new and daunting worldwide context.[23] The need for digital alternatives to conventional models that facilitate the administration of justice in all circumstances has also increased as a result of COVID-19.[24] Instead of demonstrating how courts and justice systems stop functioning, the pandemic has exposed and developed new modes of operation, such as “lawyering” online, which emphasizes how resilient an ODR is.
ODR in India has a lot of potential, but it also faces a number of obstacles, such as poor infrastructure, unclear laws, a lack of digital knowledge, and public mistrust. However, India is in a strong position to create an operational ODR model because of the chances offered by organizations like NITI Aayog, the judiciary’s receptivity to new technology, and the active legal-tech innovators and entrepreneurs.[25]
In addition to being constitutional, the transition from traditional to digital justice systems must promote access and inclusivity. ODR can support India’s objectives of justice for all in the digital sphere provided it is introduced with adequate protections, true transparency, and a task-oriented approach that prioritizes the needs of the citizens.
SAMIYA PARVEZ
LLOYD LAW COLLEGE
[1] National Judicial Data Grid, Department of Justice, Govt. of India, https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/ (last visited June 21, 2025).
[2] National Judicial Data Grid, Department of Justice, Govt. of India, https://njdg.ecourts.gov.in/njdgnew/ (last visited June 21, 2025).
[3] India Justice Report 2025, Centre for Social Justice
[4] Nat’l Ctr. for State Courts, ODR Resource Guide, https://www.ncsc.org/odr (last visited June 21, 2025).
[5] NITI Aayog, Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India (2021), https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-11/ODR-Report-Nov-2021.pdf.
[6] Sama, White Paper: Implementation of ODR in Indian Courts (2021), https://www.sama.live (last visited June 21, 2025).
[7] Julia Macfarlane, Online Dispute Resolution in Cross-Border Contexts: Comparative Perspectives, 24 Harv. Negotiation L. Rev. 101 (2019).
[8] Diksha Suri, Online Arbitration in India: Is it a Reality?, SCC Online Blog (Apr. 5, 2021), https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2021/04/05/online-arbitration-in-india.
[9] Julia Macfarlane, Online Dispute Resolution in Cross-Border Contexts: Comparative Perspectives, 24 Harv. Negotiation L. Rev. 101 (2019).
[10] Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No. 26 of 1996, Acts of Parliament, 1996 (India).
[11] Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Reports on Digitization of Justice (2020–2022), https://vidhilegalpolicy.in (last visited June 21, 2025).
[12] Sama Legal-Tech White Papers on ODR Implementation in India (2020–2022), https://sama.tech/whitepapers (last visited June 21, 2025).
[13] NITI Aayog, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Handbook 2021, https://niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-06/ODR_Handbook.pdf (last visited June 21, 2025).
[14] Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, No. 5 of 1908, Acts of Parliament, 1908 (India).
[15] Salem Bar Ass’n v. Union of India, (2015) 6 SCC 152 (India).
[16] Arbitration and Conciliation Act, No. 26 of 1996, §§ 30, 43 (India).
[17] Information Technology Act, 2000, No. 21 of 2000, §§ 5–13, 68 (India).
[18] MSME Development Act; Samadhaan Portal, Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises, Government of India, https://samadhaan.msme.gov.in (last visited June 21, 2025).
[19] Swapnil Tripathi v. Supreme Court of India, (2018) 10 SCC 639 (India).
[20] NITI Aayog, Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) Handbook 2021, supra note 5
[21] Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, supra note 3.
[22] Shalini Seetharam, Online Dispute Resolution – The Promise and Potential for India (2021).
[23] Srikumar Banerjee, The Future of Online Dispute Resolution in India, Bar & Bench (Aug. 19, 2020), https://www.barandbench.com/columns/the-future-of-online-dispute-resolution-in-india.
[24] Ministry of Law & Justice, Vision Document on Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) (2020), https://legalaffairs.gov.in/sites/default/files/Vision_ODR.pdf.
[25] NITI Aayog, Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India (2021), https://www.niti.gov.in/sites/default/files/2021-11/ODR-Report-Nov-2021.pdf.