Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution, 
RGNUL, Punjab

Ayush Srivastava, Himani Khullar* This article re-examines interim relief under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, post-2015 amendments. It analyses judicial thresholds for “inefficacious” tribunal remedies, the consequences of non-compliance with the 90-day mandate, and procedural tensions between Sections 9, 17, and 37. It critiques emerging jurisprudence, including recourse to Article 227, and evaluates proposed reforms signalling a shift towards arbi

Vani Sharma This article examines whether arbitration in anti-doping disputes truly ensures fairness for athletes, highlighting how strict liability and evidentiary burdens disproportionately disadvantage them. Through recent CAS cases, it shows that outcomes often hinge on access to resources and expert evidence. It argues for targeted reforms to address these structural inequities and make procedural fairness meaningful in practice. Introduction International sports bodies

Anshul Dalmia* Disputes concerning the consequences of a relationship breakdown have always been considered personal private matters which prevent the State from legitimately interfering either in the process or place of dispute-resolution. The only ground through which the State could intervene with the substantive outcome was that there are exceptional cases wherein the parties are vulnerable and warrant protection. In this piece, the author argues that opting for arbitrati