one law to solve all your civil legal disputes is being empowered by new amendments

Proposed amendments

Significant changes contained in the Ordinance are:

1. Amendment to § 2 (2) extending the applicability of § 9, § 27 and § (37) (1) (a) & (3) contained in Part 1 of the A&C Act to international commercial arbitrations. § 9 deals with interim relief granted by the courts and § 27 deals with court assistance to a tribunal for taking evidence. The Ordinance by clarifying what provisions in Part 1 of the A&C Act, apply to international commercial arbitrations, in effect makes it clear that other provisions of Part 1 of the A&C are not applicable to international commercial arbitration, thereby codifying the Supreme Court decision in Balco v Kaiser Aluminium (2012) 9 SCC 552.
2. Amendment to § 8 which allows even non-signatories to an arbitration agreement to be joined as parties in a domestic arbitration. The amendment effectively negates the decision of the Supreme Court inSukanya Holdings v Jayesh H Panda 2003 (5) SCC 531, where it had ruled that joinder of non-signatories to an arbitration agreement was not permissible.
3. Further amendment to § 8 requires that the judicial authority compulsorily refer parties to arbitration irrespective of any decision by the Supreme Court or any other court, if the judicial authority finds that a valid arbitration clause exists. The amendment essentially nullifies the judgment of the Supreme Court inN. Radhakrishnan v Maestro Engineers 2010 1 SCC 72, where it had ruled that serious allegations of fraud are not arbitrable. The amendment will also have implications for the Supreme Court's decision inBooz Allen Hamilton v SBI Home finance (2011) 5 SCC 53 wherein it had listed disputes that were not arbitrable.
4. § 9 of the Act is amended to restrain the courts from entertaining an Application for interim relief once arbitration has commenced. The Court is empowered to entertain such an application only if it is convinced that the arbitration tribunal will be unable to provide effective relief.  
5. The Ordinance requires the appointment of an arbitrator by the courts to be completed expeditiously, preferably within a period of sixty (60) days. Further the scope of the Courts power under § 11 has been restricted to examining the validity of the arbitration clause alone and no further. This is irrespective of any decision of the Supreme Court or any other court.
6. The Ordinance amends § 12 to include an obligation requiring a potential arbitrator to make an express disclosure on conflicts. The courts at the time of appointing an arbitrator are also empowered to demand a full disclosure on conflicts.  Schedule 5 & 7 to the Ordinance contains an exhaustive list of grounds which will assist in determining all issues of conflict. Parties however are empowered to waive any objections of conflict by consent.
7. The Ordinance introduces a comprehensive fee structure for arbitrators. The High Courts are empowered to frame necessary rules in this regard keeping in mind Schedule 4 to the Ordinance, which contains a model fee structure. Fees range from Rs 45,000 to Rs 19,87,500 depending upon the quantum of the dispute. This does not apply to international commercial arbitrations and institutional arbitrations.
8. § 17 of the A&C Act has been amended to ensure that interim relief including that of injunction granted by an arbitrator will be effective and enforceable as an order of the court.
9. The Ordinance provides for time bound arbitrations. A tribunal is obligated to deliver the final award within a period of twelve (12) months. This period can be extended by the consent of parties for an additional six (6) months. Any further extensions will require court consent. The courts on being approached for an extension are empowered to reduce the fee payable to an arbitrator by up to 5% for each month of delay and can also substitute one or all the arbitrators.
10. A provision for fast track settlement of disputes is also provided, which requires the tribunal to make its award within a period of six (6) months. To incentivize quick adjudication, in cases where the tribunal decides a matter within a period of 6 months the Ordinance provides for an additional fee payable to the tribunal by the consent of the parties.
11. The Ordinance through § 31 A also introduces an expansive cost regime. Costs are not compulsory and are at the discretion of the tribunal. The new provision lays down various factors to be considered by the tribunal at the time of determining the quantum of costs these include the result of the case and the conduct of parties.
12. To ensure court restraint in setting aside domestic awards, the Ordinance restricts the meaning of public policy under the A&C Act.  The scope of public policy is to be limited to instances where:

1. making of an award was induced by fraud or corruption or;
2. where an award is in conflict with the fundamental policy of Indian Law or;
3. an award is in conflict with the most basic notions of morality or justice.

The amendment will neutralize judgments such as ONGC v Saw Pipes (2003) 5 SCC 705 and DDA v R.S. Sharma (2008) 3 SCC 80, which had expanded the scope of Indian public policy under the A&C Act. Similar amendments have also been introduced in § 48 and § 57 making the test of public policy a uniform one for domestic and international awards.

13. § 34 of the A&C Act has been further amended to ensure that a challenge to the award is disposed of by the courts within a period of one (1) year.
14. In National Aluminium Co. Ltd v Pressteel & Fabrications, (2004) 1 SCC 540 the Supreme Court had ruled that pending a § 34 challenge, there is an automatic stay on the operation of an arbitration award. The Ordinance amends § 36 to permit operation of an award pending challenge. The court under § 36(3) is empowered to stay the operation of the award on such terms and conditions as it deems fit. This could include taking a money deposit from the losing party.