India’s commercial dispute resolution framework needs greater finality, simpler procedures and stronger mediation mechanisms as businesses face increasingly complex disputes around AI, data, IPR and cybersecurity, Amar Sundram, General Counsel, Sr. VP (Legal) & Chief Compliance Officer, NEC Corporation India Pvt Ltd, said.
Speaking to ETLegalWorld on the sidelines of the 5th edition of ETLegalWorld’s Commercial Dispute Conclave 2026, Sundram said the discussions at the conclave highlighted the need to strengthen India’s dispute resolution ecosystem if the country is to sustain its economic growth.
“India needs to be very, very confident and needs to build up a very, very strong dispute resolution mechanism if India has to grow economically,” Sundram said.
According to Sundram, one of the key concerns emerging from the discussions was the absence of finality in commercial disputes, particularly in arbitration matters.
“There is no finality to any kind of a judgment. So, if there is an arbitration award, there is no immediate finality. People go to 34, people go to 37, people go to Supreme Court. And therefore, the whole process takes a very, very long time,” he said.
Even when an arbitration award is in favour of a party, the dispute can continue through subsequent legal challenges, delaying the point at which the matter is finally settled.
“All the panelists in one voice said that there should be a finality of the judgment which ultimately comes up,” Sundram said.
Mediation can help reduce litigation
Sundram also highlighted mediation as an increasingly important mechanism for resolving commercial disputes before they reach courts or arbitral tribunals.
“Mediation is fast becoming an effective tool for dispute resolutions,” he said, adding that an effective mediation system could help minimise disputes that otherwise proceed to litigation or arbitration.
He also called for a simpler approach to dispute resolution, with greater emphasis on substantive law and less procedural complexity.
“Less of complexities, more of substantive law, less of procedural law, when you talk about arbitration, when you talk about negotiation, when you talk about mediation. That needs to be there,” Sundram said.
“Too many complexities, too many procedural law will defeat the whole purpose of speedy resolution of your dispute,” he added.
GCs could play larger role as mediators
Sundram suggested that experienced general counsels could have a larger role to play in mediation, given their understanding of both legal principles and the commercial realities of businesses.
“The general counsels who work for corporates and experienced general counsels could be a very good mediators, not only because they know the law, but also because over a period of time, they have known the corporate side, they have known how the business works,” he said.
This understanding, he said, can enable GCs to identify ways of resolving differences before they escalate into court proceedings or arbitration.
“Maybe somewhere the government should give some kind of a recognition to these general counsels and especially the senior general counsels as quality mediators, as panel mediators,” Sundram said.
Such recognition could help address the burden of pending litigation, he added.
“A lot of these differences need not necessarily go to the court if general counsels are given some kind of a statutory recognition as qualified mediators,” he said.
AI, data and IPR to reshape commercial disputes
Sundram also pointed to the changing nature of commercial disputes, particularly as businesses adopt artificial intelligence and increasingly rely on data and technology.
“The nature of litigation, the nature of dispute in next five years will be very, very different from what it is today,” he said.
According to Sundram, disputes involving AI, data and intellectual property are likely to become more prominent, including questions around new copyright and patent issues.
“There will be dispute differences, conflicts relating to AI, there will be dispute differences and conflicts relating to data, there will be dispute differences relating to IPR,” he said.
He also flagged cybersecurity and cybercrime as emerging areas that could generate new categories of commercial disputes.
“These are new areas which will come up. Do we have quality, qualified arbitrator mediator to handle this? That’s an area which we should be looking into,” Sundram said.
He said building a pool of arbitrators and mediators equipped to handle these emerging technology-related disputes would be an important part of developing India’s commercial dispute resolution ecosystem.
“And that’s the new area where the whole commercial dispute will develop,” he said.
[Opinions expressed are personal]
