In India, arbitration has become a vital substitute for conventional court battles, presenting a swifter and more adaptable route to settle disagreements. However, the typical arbitration procedure can occasionally be protracted and costly, thereby compromising its fundamental aim. To counter this, India implemented Section 29B of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which facilitates Fast Track Arbitration, a simplified method intended to accelerate resolutions while preserving equity.

For instance, in commercial disputes involving construction contracts or supply agreements, companies can opt for Fast Track Arbitration to avoid years of litigation. Under this provision, strict timelines are enforced, and oral hearings are often limited or dispensed with entirely. The arbitrators focus on written submissions and documents, ensuring a quicker decision. This streamlined process not only saves time but also significantly reduces the legal costs associated with lengthy proceedings, making dispute resolution more efficient and accessible for businesses.

What is Fast Track Arbitration?

Fast Track Arbitration provides an accelerated arbitration process designed to resolve disputes within six months of the arbitral tribunal's establishment. This method focuses on efficiency by reducing delays, primarily through minimizing or foregoing oral hearings, except when essential. Emphasis is placed on comprehensive written submissions from the parties involved. Typically, a single arbitrator is appointed to oversee the process. This streamlined approach is particularly advantageous in commercial disputes where businesses require swift resolutions and wish to avoid lengthy and complex legal proceedings. It offers a practical solution for achieving timely and cost-effective outcomes. Fast-track arbitration emerged as a response to the need for efficient dispute resolution within international commercial arbitration, not originating from a single nation. Global institutions like the ICC have been instrumental in developing expedited procedures. The concept's evolution reflects a broader trend towards streamlining arbitration processes, adapting to the demands of modern commerce. While the concept developed internationally, certain countries have formalized fast-track arbitration in their legal frameworks. Notably, India, through its 2015 Arbitration and Conciliation Amendment Act, explicitly incorporated "Fast Track Arbitration," codifying it into Indian law. This highlights that while the concept is international, countries have adapted and codified it into their legal systems.

Section 29B - The Legal Foundation:

Section 29B of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act of 1996, amended in 2015, sets the guidelines for Fast Track Arbitration. Key elements include:

• Mutual Consent: Both parties must explicitly agree to use Fast Track Arbitration.
• Single Arbitrator: A sole arbitrator is responsible for resolving the dispute, facilitating quicker decisions.
• Written Focus: Proceedings primarily rely on written pleadings and documents, reducing delays.
• Hearings When Necessary: Oral hearings are only held if the arbitrator deems them essential.
• Six-Month Deadline: The final award must be issued within six months of the tribunal's constitution.
• Court Extensions: In exceptional circumstances, a court can extend the deadline.

The Advantages of Speed:

Fast Track Arbitration has several benefits over traditional arbitration and court battles:

• Time Savings: The six-month limit ensures a quick resolution.
• Cost Efficiency: Fewer procedures and hearings mean lower costs.
• Award Finality: Limited appeal options provide certainty and closure.
• Flexibility: Parties can tailor procedural rules to their specific needs.
• Reduced Court Involvement: Speedy resolutions minimize judicial intervention.

Challenges to Consider:

Despite its advantages, Fast Track Arbitration has limitations:

• Limited Evidence: The focus on written submissions might restrict the full presentation of arguments.
• Not for Complex Cases: Some disputes need detailed hearings, which may not be suitable for Fast Track Arbitration.
• Agreement Hurdles: Reaching a mutual agreement to use the process can be difficult.
• Tight Deadlines: The six-month timeline may not be sufficient for cases needing in-depth investigation.

How Courts View It:
Indian courts favour Fast Track Arbitration, promoting its timely completion and respecting its decisions. They stress sticking to the agreed schedules and limiting intervention in the arbitral awards. Generally, courts refrain from reversing these awards unless a serious injustice has occurred, as determined by Section 34, which deals with setting aside arbitration decisions. This approach demonstrates the judiciary's commitment to upholding the integrity and efficiency of the Fast Track Arbitration process while ensuring fairness and preventing significant miscarriages of justice.

Fast Track vs. Regular Arbitration: A Comparison:

Aspect	Fast Track Arbitration	Regular Arbitration
Timeframe	6 months	Can take years
Arbitrators	Sole arbitrator	Single or multiple arbitrators
Oral Hearings	Only if necessary	Commonly conducted
Procedure	Written submissions	Hearings, witness examination
Cost	Lower	Higher

Global Perspectives:
To accelerate dispute resolution, numerous nations have embraced expedited arbitration methods. Prominent institutions such as the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) and the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) provide streamlined regulations designed for quicker outcomes. Specifically, the ICC's Expedited Procedure Provisions (EPP) and SIAC's Expedited Arbitration Rules are geared towards resolving disputes in approximately six months or less. By implementing these measures, the efficiency of international arbitration is significantly enhanced. These accelerated processes offer a more time-sensitive and cost-effective alternative to traditional arbitration, making them an attractive option for parties seeking rapid resolutions.

The Future of Fast Track in India:
India's embrace of Fast Track Arbitration demonstrates its ambition to be a prominent hub for international arbitration. The 2019 amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 reinforces this framework, promoting both speed and trustworthiness in the arbitration process. With companies increasingly desiring quicker dispute settlements, Fast Track Arbitration is poised for wider use, particularly in sectors like construction, infrastructure projects, and general business agreements. This streamlined approach offers a more efficient alternative to traditional litigation, aligning with the needs of modern commerce and solidifying India's position in the global arbitration landscape.

Conclusion:
Section 29B's Fast Track Arbitration offers a vital avenue for faster, cheaper dispute resolution in India. Its effectiveness hinges on parties' cooperation, skilled arbitrators, and strong judicial support. Successful implementation promises several benefits. It can reduce the burden on courts, improve India's standing as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction, and build confidence in the arbitration system. This streamlined process encourages efficient settlements, benefiting businesses and strengthening the overall legal framework for dispute resolution in India.

Written By: Md.Imran Wahab, IPS, IGP, Provisioning, West Bengal
Email: imranwahab216@gmail.com, Ph no: 9836576565