AI-ASSISTED ARBITRATION UNDER THE INDIAN ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION ACT, 1996: FEASIBILITY AND DESIRABILITY

The increasing use of artificial intelligence in arbitration has moved from experimental pilots to institutional practice in several leading arbitral fora. The American Arbitration Association–International Centre for Dispute Resolution (AAA–ICDR) has launched an "AI arbitrator" for documents-only construction disputes, which analyses submissions, structures issues, and drafts awards subject to human oversight, while expressly preserving the final decision-making authority of human arbitrators. In parallel, the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission (CIETAC) has issued the Asia-Pacific region's first Guidelines on the Use of Artificial Intelligence Technology in Arbitration, emphasizing party autonomy, transparency, proportionality, and the non‑deferability of adjudicative functions, and the Chartered Institute of Arbitrators (Ciarb) has promulgated a global guideline on AI in arbitration built around similar principles. These developments reflect a broader turn toward efficiency-driven adjudication, in which AI tools support fact‑management, legal analysis, and the generation of reasoned awards. By contrast, the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 ("the 1996 Act"), though technologically neutral and heavily grounded in party autonomy, is silent on AI-assisted decision-making. Key provisions, Section 19 on procedural flexibility, Section 28 on the applicable substantive law, Section 31 on reasoned awards, and Section 34 on judicial review have been interpreted by the Supreme Court to require an independent application of mind by arbitrators and strict adherence to principles of natural justice, especially through the doctrinal evolution of "public policy" and "patent illegality" in cases such as ONGC v Saw Pipes and Associate Builders v DDA. Against this background, this article pursues two aims. First, it examines whether AI-assisted arbitration, where AI tools provide analytical and drafting support but humans retain decisional aut...