Authored By – ASHA KUMARI MANJHI, BHADRAK LAW COLLEGE ,BHADRAK

A) Introduction:

In recent years,arbitration has grown leaps and bounds worldwide.Due to the underlying princilpes of party autonomy and confidentiality,it has flourished as a standalone dispute resolution mechanism.The arbitration agreement forms a binding procedure to be followed by the parties as well as the arbitral tribunal in its decision making.The underlying principles of arbitration such as party autonomy and confidentiality have made it an attractive choice of dispute resolution among the parties,however,the technicalities involved in arbitration can make it seem a tad bit daunting.

One must understand that unlike the traditional dispute resolution methods,the arbitral process does not being from the date the dispute arises.Regardless of the dispute,the arbitration process starts when the parties enter into an arbitration agreement.At the time of dispute,it is the arbitration agreement that mandates,guides and establishes the arbitration proceedings.In other words,the facts decide and guide the law,not the other way round.The arbitration agreement,therefore,becomes a vital aspect of any agreement where the parties choose to take their issues to arbitrate,and requires considerable brainstroming and foresight. The present article trace the recent developments in the arbitration domain and attempts to encapsulate the guidelines and principles necessary to draft a watertight arbitration agreement.

Keywords (Minimum 5):

• Arbitrability of Disputes
• Arbitration Agreement and its forms
• Drafting and Arbitration Agreement
• History of Arbitration in India
• Arbitration Agreement need to be signed, stamped.

B) Meaning ,Definition & Explanation :

Meaning – An arbitration agreement is a legally binding contract that allows parties to resolve disputes outside of court. It’s a type of alternative dispute resolution (ADR) procedure.  In arbitration, a trained, professional, and neutral arbitrator acts as a judge who will render a decision to end your dispute. Arbitrators are often retired judges, but that doesn’t mean they follow traditional legal procedures to the letter. Arbitration is actually a highly flexible process whose ground rules are open to negotiation (for more on the differences between arbitration and mediation, read also Undecided on Your Dispute Resolution Process? Combine Mediation and Arbitration, Known as Med-Arb).

Arbitration guidelines tend to be the following, write Sarah Rudolph Cole and Kristen M. Blankley in their chapter, “Arbitration,” in The Handbook of Dispute Resolution (Jossey-Bass, 2005). Together, the parties choose an arbitrator from a list provided by an arbitration firm. . The arbitration is held in a private conference room rather than a public courtroom. The arbitrator begins by presenting the ground rules; then each party makes an opening statement, or their lawyers do. Next, each party presents its evidence and, if necessary, brings in witnesses to support its claims. During this time, the arbitrator may ask questions to clarify her understanding of the issues (for more on the pros and cons of arbitration versus mediation as a dispute resolution procedure, see also Mediation and the Conflict Resolution Process).

Finally, the parties deliver closing statements and, in some cases, submit post-hearing briefs that summarize their arguments. Then, within the parties’ deadline, the arbitrator issues a written decision or award, sometimes with an opinion attached. Unlike in litigation, the arbitrator’s decision usually cannot be appealed.

Definition –

Section 7(1) of the Act provides that an 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.

Section 7(2) lays down that an arbitration agreement may be in the form of an arbitration clause in a contract or in the form of a separate agreement.

An arbitration agreement must be in writing. 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.

Section 7(5) provides that 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.

An arbitration agreement stands on the same footing as any other agreement. It is binding upon the parties unless it is influenced by fraud or coercion or undue influence, etc. An essential requirement of an arbitration agreement under section 7 is that the agreement must be in writing. An oral arbitration agreement is not recognised as arbitration agreement under this section. The implied requirement of sub-section (1) of section 7 is the competency of parties to enter into contract. Lack of such capacity invalidates the contract. Section 34(2)(i) makes an arbitral award liable to be set aside if a party was under some incapacity at the time of entering into the arbitration agreement.

Explanation-

As compared to a lawsuit, arbitration is relatively inexpensive, brief, and confidential. The courts usually refuse to overturn arbitrated decisions and can step in to make sure they are enforced. This means that arbitrations lead to final outcomes that allow parties to move forward, while also avoiding the public scrutiny that can accompany a court trial.

In addition, arbitration allows for more creative rulings than civil courts can issue. If you sue your former employer for wrongful termination, for example, the court can award you only monetary damages, according to Cole and Blankley. By contrast, in addition to (or instead of) awarding damages, an arbitrator could order the company to reinstate you.

C) Historical Background / Evolution

The codified practise of arbitration in India dates back to the nineteenth century when the government enacted the Indian Arbitration ACT,1899.The  Act ,however was,confined to the three princely states I.e. Bombay ,Madras and Calcutta .Later ,however ,arbitration found mention in the Code of Civil Procedure ,1902 under Section 89. But due to lack of robust proicedural modalities , it merited an independent statute. In turn,the Arbitration Act,1940 (hereinafter 1940 Act ) came into force which applied to the whole of India .The 1940 Act , although an improvement to the prior Act ,proved inefficient ,cumbersome and lacking in the various domains.The Act also faced criticism from the apex court; Justice D.A. Desai stated in Guru Nanak Foundation v Ratan Singh -” Interminable ,time – consuming,complex and expensive court procedures impelled jurists to search for an alternative Forum ,less formal ,more effective and speedy for resolution of disputes,avoiding procedural claptrap and this led them to Arbitration Act 1940 .However ,the way in which the proceedings under the Act are conducted and without exception challenged in courts has made Lawyers laugh and legal philosophers weep.” 

Hence,the Arbitration and Concilation Act ,1996 (hereinafter 1996 Act or the Act ) was enacted ,based on the UNITRAL  Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration ,1985 . The new Act came into force with a breath of fresh air of an expedited and improved procedure.It also attracted cross broder trade and investment after the remarkable shift of global policy in 1991.The Arbitration and Concilitation Act 1996, consolidated and amended .

Despite the far -reaching improvements made in the statute ,arbitration failed to emerge as a sound and reliable resolution mechanism due to a multitude of reasons .Due to the lack of a fee matrix ,the arbitrators bombarded the parties by charging exorbitant fes. The application to the High Court seeking an award to be set aside under Section -34 automatically stayed the enforcement of thw award,thereby prolonging the remedy to the award holding party .Furthermore,ther was no time limit to ensure that the promise of the expedite procedure is actually fulfilled .After facing seriouss challenges with the 1996 Act ,the government invited suggestions from several eminent juristis and amended the Act in 2015 .The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment ) Act 2015 brought sweeping changes to the procedure and entailed a series of strong judicial enterpretations .The amendment was essentially founded on the principles to strengthen the arbitral tribunal and minimise the scope of intervention by the court.

 Despite these improvements ,the lack of institutional arbitration culture was felt strongly as most of the arbitrations were ad hoc .A High -Level Committee to Review the institutionalisation of Arbitration Mechanism in India was constituted on 13 th January 2017 and  headed by Justice B.N Srikrishna . In Line with the committee’s recommendations,the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment ) Act ,2019 was passed.The highlight of the amendment was the introduction of the Arbitration Council of India (ACI) to promote arbitration and grade arbitration institutions.

D) Comparison with other Countries 

The international arbitration process often begins before a dispute ever arises – with the parties’ decision to include an arbitration clause in their contract. This is the first strategic decision made by the parties in resolving their dispute, and perhaps the most important. Thus, the parties should seize the opportunity to take control of their arbitration clauses when drafting an agreement.

Parties include arbitration clauses in their contracts with the aim of solving future disputes in a timely and cost-effective manner. A carelessly drafted arbitration agreementmay become a pathological clause i.e., one that is not enforceable or is ambiguous, giving rise to expensive and time-consuming legal challenges. In drafting the arbitration clause, certainmandatory requirements must be included. Beyond these provisionsa multitude of additional, optional provisions may be included at the discretion of the parties.

There is no such thing as a single ‘model’ or ‘all-purpose’ arbitration clause that is ideal for all contracts. Rather, each arbitration clause must be carefully tailored to the specific circumstances of the contract and the requirements of the parties, taking into account the types of disputes that may arise, the needs of the parties, and the applicable laws. Unfortunately, because the arbitration clause is often one of the last contractual provisions negotiated, it is often simply inserted at the last minute with the parties merely using from clauses. Failing to include essential provisions or failing to tailor the arbitration clause to the exigenciesof the specific contract can result in inefficiency, unnecessary conflict and increased expense once a dispute arises. But when in doubt, a simple clause like the model institutional clauses may be the best decision.

E) Causes / Effect Relation with other Concepts 

Any dispute,controversy,orclaim arising outof, relating to, or in connection with this contract, including with respect to the formation, applicability, breach, termination, validity or enforceability thereof, shall be finally settled by arbitration. The arbitration shall be conducted by arbitrators, in accordance with rules in effect at the time of the arbitration, except as they may be modified therein or by mutual agreement of the parties.These at of the arbitration shall be city, country, and it shall be conducted in the specified language.

The arbitration award shall be final and binding on the parties. The parties undertake to carry out any award without delay and waive their right to any form of recourse based on grounds other than those contained in the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958insofar as such waiver can validly be made.Judgment upon the award may be entered by any court having jurisdiction thereof or having jurisdiction over the relevant party or its assets.

Broad/narrow :In most instances, parties should submit all disputes to arbitration. It is possible, however, to agree to arbitrate only specific types or categories of disputes. If the latter course is chosen, the scope of the reference to arbitration should be carefully and precisely delineated in the arbitration clause. Even with careful drafting, however, there is a significant risk that when a dispute arises one party will claim that the dispute does not fall within the scope of the arbitration clause. Such a preliminary dispute will delay and make more expensive eventual resolution of the primary dispute. For that reason, it is preferable to use a broad clause as the model text proposes.

In some instances, arbitration agreements include “split” clauses, which provide for arbitration, but grant one party the choice of going to court instead. Such clauses should generally be drafted with the utmost caution, given that they can be ineffective in certain jurisdictions. For further information on split clauses, see point 3 below in the Optional Clauses section.

Number of arbitrators: The decision to select one or more arbitrators depends on the nature of the contract, the amount that may be in dispute and the complexity of the potential controversies. Having one arbitrator is less expensive and often more expeditious, and is preferred for smaller disputes or if issues do not need the analysis of three arbitrators. A three-person tribunal can often better analyse complex factual and legal issues, and therefore may increase the likelihood of a fair, well-reasoned result. Moreover, a three-arbitrator panel provides the parties with more control over the nature of the tribunal, since the parties will generally each select one party-appointed arbitrator.

Generally, although parties are allowed to select any number of arbitrators, it is rarely advisable to select an even number of arbitrators. In the absence of agreement between parties, the administering institution’s rules will govern the number of arbitrators.

Rules : Generally, the arbitration clause should be coordinated with and reflect the arbitration rules that are chosen to govern the arbitration. One of the first choices faced by the parties is whether to opt for institutional versus ad hoc arbitration. Institutional arbitration involves an arbitral institution providing administrative assistance with running an arbitration (such as facilitating communications, arranging for hearings, paying arbitrators) in exchange for a fee, while ad hoc arbitration requires the parties themselves to attend to such administrative details. Although some disputes may be conducive to the selection of ad hoc rules-for instance in cases in which the parties are experienced in international arbitration-the relatively low administrative fee charged by an institution often provides good value. Institutions generally supply efficient administrative services, assist in ensuring that arbitrators do their job and may even help arbitrators produce error-free awards.

In selecting an arbitration institution or ad hoc rules to govern the arbitration, counsel should consider whether it is more likely that it will be the claimant or the respondent in any arbitration.

Method of Selecting Arbitrators: The rules chosen should be consulted to see if the rules themselves provide for a satisfactory procedure. Common to most forms of arbitration, the “appointing authority” is typically responsible for confirming arbitrators nominated by the parties and appointing arbitrators when the parties fail to nominate them or delegate authority for appointing arbitrators to an institution.

In administered arbitrations, relevant rules usually provide that the chosen institution will act as appointing authority.

In UNCITRAL or other ad hoc arbitrations, the arbitration clause should provide for an appointing authority. The ICC International Court of Arbitration, AAA and LCIA are most often used as appointing authorities and are highly recommended.

In most cases, the default method selected by the rules is satisfactory, and additional text on the subject in the clause is unnecessary.

Seat of the arbitration : The “seat” of an arbitration is the jurisdiction in which the arbitration is legally based. Each jurisdiction has laws governing the conduct of the arbitrations seated there. Mandatory procedural rules, if any, of the legal seat of the arbitration cannot be overcome by agreement of the parties or by rulings of the arbitrators. National courts in the country of the seat have the ability to review and potentially to vacate or set aside awards, and awards set aside by courts at the seat of the arbitration may not be enforceable elsewhere. Before drafting an arbitration clause and selecting the seat of an arbitration, counsel should therefore carefully review the arbitration law of the proposed seat of arbitration and the history of court interference with arbitrations in that seat to ensure that that law will not hinder arbitration of disputes that may arise under the contract. It is also important that the arbitration clause be consistent with the arbitration law of the seat of the arbitration.

For reasons of convenience, the parties may agree that the hearings be held in a place other than the seat of the arbitration. Such a provision, whether in the clause or agreed upon at the time of arbitration, if properly drafted, does not change the legal seat of the arbitration. An arbitration clause, or a provision for the seat of the arbitration, does not serve the same function as a choice of law clause. The arbitration law of the seat may provide some background procedural rules regulating the arbitration. In contrast, a choice of law clause establishes the substantive law governing the contract itself. Thus, it is of utmost importance to include, in addition to the arbitration clause, a provision providing for the law governing the contract.

Because of the diverse legal schemes applicable to international arbitrations that exist in jurisdictions around the world, the recommended language for the model clause varies depending on the seat.

Language: If the parties are from countries with different languages, it is important to provide for the language of the arbitration. In the absence of such a provision, arbitrators will typically select the language of the contract as the language of the arbitration, but this is not always the case.

If the parties are from countries with a common language, it is not necessary to include a provision regarding language, but it may nevertheless be advisable. Parties should keep in mind that the selection of more than one language can add to the cost and length of proceedings, and it is advisable to select one language in most cases.

Finality of the Award : Although most rules provide that arbitral awards are final and binding on the parties, it is generally preferable to include this language as a safeguard. The language relating to the parties’ compliance with awards without delay and waiver as to any form of recourse is included to bolster the finality of the award, but it is important to note that the effectiveness and conditions of such waiver depend on the applicable law.

Judgment on the Award : This language is necessary to simplify the exercise of jurisdiction in any enforcement action in the United States under the Federal Arbitration Act. Enforcement jurisdiction should generally be a simple matter in those countries that have ratified the New York Convention. Unfortunately, the applicable law in some countries, including the United States, can lead to disputes over jurisdiction and venue for the enforcement of awards. It is therefore highly recommended that this language, which can avoid extensive collateral litigation at a later date, be included in any standard arbitration clause.

F) Types / Kinds 

Arbitration clauses can be classified into three categories: basic, general and complex clauses.

1. Basic clauses are those that include only the most basic provisions – those that are essential to a viable arbitration agreement. Most institutional model clauses are basic clauses.
2. General clauses are perhaps the mostcommon type of arbitral provisions for substantial transactions. They include certain optional provisions beyond those in a basic clause, designed to solve particular problems (eg, providing for the venue, language, governing law, negotiation or mediation stages, etc). General clauses are typically used when some, but not all, potential provisions are needed, or when the parties are unwilling to risk deviating from institutional rules or violating mandatory rules of the applicable law and theydo not have the time or resources to research the issue. Examples of these clauses may be found in the energy industry in joint operating, drilling, natural gas supply and power plant construction agreements.
3. Complex clauses include some more unusual provisions in addition those which are generally accepted. These clauses must be carefully tailored to prevent inconsistencies and meticulously researched to prevent provisions that might invalidate the clause in a given jurisdiction. Beyond those included in general clauses, provisions that may be included in a complex clause include: (i) confidentiality, (ii) discovery, (iii) multi-party arbitration, (iv) consolidation, (v) split clauses requiring litigation of some issues and arbitration of others, (vi) expert determination, (vii) arbitrability, (viii) waivers of appeals or consent to appeals, and (ix) authorisation to adapt the contract or fill gaps, among others.

G) Forms / Modes 

A fundamentals requirement under section-7 of the 1997 Act is that an arbitration agreement shall be in writing .Besides that ,section 7 grants liberty tio the parties to from an arbitration agreement in multiple ways as enumerated below:

1. A standalone Separate Arbitration Agreement

A standalone separate arbitration agreement can be formed in addition and reference to the operative agreement between the parties.

1. An Arbitration Clause

An arbitration clause can be formed in the operative agreement as to the section of the agreement that deals with the rights and options of the parties in the event of a legal dispute  arising out of the contract .An arbitration clause is construed as an arbitration agreement.

• Incorporation by reference – An arbitration clause contained in a separate contract can also incorporated in a contract being drafted.As per section 7 (5) ,any reference to a document containing an arbitration clause shall also be construed as an arbitration agreement provided that the referred contract in writing and the reference is made with the intention to make that arbitration clause the part of the contract.
• By Communication

According to Section 7(b) of the 1996 Act ,an arbitration agreement can also be inferred from the exchange of letters ,telex ,telegrams ,or other means of telecommunication ,which provide a record  of the agreement between the parties.In short ,an agreement can be construed from the correspondence of the parties where there is a clear and  unequivocal intention to refer the disputes to arbitration .

Recentely ,in Galaxy Infra and Engineering Pvt Ltd v. Pravin Electricals Pvt .Ltd the Delhi High  Court held that the draft agreement exchanged by email between the parties can be construed as valid arbitration agreement.

In Pravinchandra Murji Salva v. Meghji Murji Shah ,it was held that it is the substance of the agreement and not the form which is of importance.

Also ,as per Section 7  of the 1996 Act and S.N. Prasad v. Monnet Finance Ltd , where a statement of claims or allegations is made and is met with ‘non -denial ‘by the other party,the presence of an arbitration agreement can be construed .

Even though the 1996 Act has left the filed open with a plethora of ways to from an arbitration agreement ,it is always recommended as a standard practice to choose to have an arbitration clause in contract itself.

H) Essentials / Elements / Pre-requisites 

Arbitration agreement is a written contract that defines how a dispute will be resolved through arbitration. The essential elements of an arbitration agreement include: 

• Governing law: The law that will govern the arbitration agreement. This helps avoid legal interpretation complications. 
• Appointment of an arbitrator: The process for appointing an arbitrator or panel of arbitrators. The parties can set qualifications or criteria for the arbitrators. 
• Arbitrability of disputes: The question of whether a dispute is eligible for arbitration. 
• Choice of law: The language in which the arbitration will take place. This is especially important if the parties are from different countries. 
• Finality of award: The award made by the arbitrator is final and binding on the parties. 
• Multi-tiered dispute resolution: The procedures that must be followed before arbitration can take place. 
• Genuine dispute: The dispute that will be resolved through arbitration. 
• Parties’ intent to arbitrate: The parties’ agreement to resolve the dispute through arbitration. 
• Parties’ signatures: The signatures of the parties on the arbitration agreement. 

The arbitration agreement should be clear and enforceable to promote fair and efficient dispute resolution. 

I) Defences / Exceptions / Exceptions to Defences 

Non-Existence of Agreement: A party may argue that no valid arbitration agreement exists, as seen in M/S. Abhibus Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Pallavan Transport Consultancies Ltd., where the court examined the incorporation of an arbitration clause by reference.

Fraud or Coercion: If an agreement is induced by fraud or coercion, its validity can be challenged.

Exceptions to Defenses:

Enforceability and Challenges to Arbitration Agreements

While arbitration is favored in India, agreements are not immune to challenges. The Act provides grounds for challenging an arbitration agreement’s validity:

• Lack of Capacity: A party lacking the legal capacity to contract cannot be bound.
• Undue Influence or Fraud: Agreements procured through undue influence, coercion, or fraud are challengeable.
• Public Policy: Agreements contravening public policy are unenforceable. Courts interpret this cautiously.
• Non-compliance with Stamp Act: The Supreme Court clarified in In Re: Interplay between Arbitration Agreements under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 and the Indian Stamp Act, 1899 that insufficient stamping is a curable defect, not rendering the agreement void.

The “separability doctrine” holds that an arbitration clause is independent of the main contract. Even if the main contract is void, the arbitration clause may still be enforceable. Section 16 of the Act deals with the court’s role in determining the existence and validity of arbitration agreements. Courts generally adopt a pro-arbitration stance, referring disputes to arbitration unless there are compelling reasons to invalidate the agreement.  Recent Supreme Court judgments emphasize this approach.

J) Legal Provisions / Procedure / Specifications / Criteria 

The Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended, governs arbitration agreements in India. Key provisions include:

Section 7: Defines an arbitration agreement and its requirements.

Section 8: Mandates judicial authorities to refer parties to arbitration if a valid agreement exists, unless it is prima facie void.

Section 16: Empowers the arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction, including objections regarding the existence or validity of the arbitration agreement.

K) Guidelines / Rules / Regulations / Notifications / Circulars 

1. While there is no specific form of an arbitration agreement, the words used should disclose a determination and obligation to go to arbitration and not merely contemplate the possibility of going for arbitration. Where there is merely a possibility of the parties agreeing to arbitration in future, as contrasted from an obligation to refer disputes to arbitration, there is no valid and binding arbitration agreement.
2. But where the clause relating to settlement of disputes, contains words which specifically exclude any of the attributes of an arbitration agreement or contains anything that detracts from an arbitration agreement, it will not be arbitration agreement. For example, where an agreement requires or permits an authority to decide a claim or dispute without hearing, or requires the authority to act in the interests of only one of the parties, or provides that the decision of the authority will not be final and binding on the parties, or that if either party is not satisfied with the decision of the authority, he may file a civil suit seeking relief, it cannot be termed as an arbitration agreement.
3. But mere use of the word “arbitration” or “arbitrator” in a clause will not make it an arbitration agreement, if it requires or contemplates a further or fresh consent of the parties for reference to arbitration
4. Such clauses merely indicate a desire or hope to have the disputes settled by arbitration, or a tentative arrangement to explore arbitration as a mode of settlement if and when a dispute arises. Such clauses require the parties to arrive at a further agreement to go to arbitration, as and when the disputes arise. Any agreement or clause in an agreement requiring or contemplating a further consent or consensus before a reference to arbitration, is not an arbitration agreement, but an agreement to enter into an arbitration agreement in future.

The Court observed that in the present case, the substantive part of the Clause 15 makes it clear that there is no arbitration agreement between the parties agreeing to refer either present or future disputes to arbitration.

“The above extract makes it abundantly clear that clause 15 of the Contract Agreement is a dispute resolution mechanism at the company level, rather than an arbitration agreement. Consequently, in case of a dispute, the respondent was supposed to write to the Engineer-in-charge for resolving the dispute. Clause 15 does not comport with the essential attributes of an arbitration agreement in terms of section 7 of the 1996 Act as well as the principles laid down under Jagdish Chander (supra)

L) Case Laws / Precedents / Overruling Judgments :

• Satyam Infoway Ltd. v. Sifynet Solutions Pvt. Ltd.:
• M/S. Abhibus Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Pallavan Transport Consultancies Ltd.

Interpretations / Explanations (if any)

• Separability Doctrine: As mentioned, this doctrine ensures the arbitration clause remains valid even if the main contract is void.
• Competence-Competence Principle: Allows the arbitral tribunal to determine its own jurisdice.

M) Future Implications:

With the evolving legal landscape, arbitration agreements must be drafted with precision to avoid ambiguities. The judiciary’s pro-arbitration stance suggests a continued emphasis on upholding valid arbitration agreements and minimizing judicial interference.

N) Conclusion & Comments:

Arbitration agreements are foundational to the arbitration process, offering an alternative to traditional litigation. Ensuring their validity requires careful attention to legal requirements and potential challenges. As jurisprudence evolves, parties must remain vigilant in drafting and executing these agreements to safeguard their enforceability.

O) References

1. Books / Commentaries / Journals Referred
   Agrud Partners, “Arbitration Agreements in India: A Comprehensive Guide”

2. Online Articles / Sources Referred
   Legal Vidhiya, “Arbitration Agreement, Essentials, and Law of Severability” legalvidhiya.com

3. Cases Referred
   M/S. Abhibus Services India Pvt. Ltd. vs Pallavan Transport Consultancies Ltd. indiankanoon.org

4. Statutes Referred
   Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996