Online Dispute Resolution

Introduction

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) has emerged as a paradigm‐shifting innovation in the field of dispute resolution, harnessing information and communication technologies (ICT) to deliver arbitration, mediation, and negotiation services entirely online. Far from simply replicating traditional ADR over video calls, ODR reimagines the entire lifecycle of a dispute—filing, case management, evidence exchange, hearings, and award enforcement—through interoperable digital protocols. Its rise correlates with the exponential growth of cross‑border e‑commerce and the need for low‑cost, rapid mechanisms to resolve high‑volume, low‑value disputes without burdening courts.

In India, the COVID‑19 pandemic accelerated the push toward digital justice, prompting NITI Aayog’s Expert Committee to publish “Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India” in October 2021, which laid out a phased roadmap for institutionalizing ODR across public and private platforms. Globally, UNCITRAL’s non‑binding “Technical Notes on Online Dispute Resolution” (2016) established guiding principles—impartiality, transparency, efficiency, and due process—for systems resolving cross‑border, low‑value sales or service disputes.

It is also crucial to delineate the conceptual and procedural differences between Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and traditional Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). While both operate outside formal courtrooms and seek expedited conflict resolution, ADR often retains the hallmarks of conventional legal proceedings, such as synchronous hearings and location-based constraints. In contrast, ODR introduces intelligent case routing, self-help negotiation tools, and data analytics to continuously improve dispute outcomes, enabling scale without sacrificing fairness. The result is a more dynamic, inclusive, and cost-efficient system that aligns with the needs of a digital-first society.

Definition and Legal Framework in India

‘Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)’ as defined in legislation(s)

Although no single Indian statute provides a standalone definition of ODR, its contours are drawn across several key enactments that together enable fully digital dispute processes. Under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an “arbitration agreement” may now be concluded and communicated “through electronic means,” thus recognizing email and other digital exchanges as valid instruments to commence an arbitral proceedings. The Information Technology Act, 2000 provides the foundational definitions of “electronic record” (s.2(1)(t)), “digital signature” (s.2(1)(ta)), and expressly validates electronic contracts (s.10A) and presumes the integrity of digital signatures (s.85B, Evidence Act) (Lexology, S.S. Rana & Co.). The Consumer Protection Act, 2019 empowers consumers to file complaints electronically via an “E‑Daakhil” portal and permits virtual hearings, embedding online resolution into the consumer‑redress architecture. Finally, the draft Mediation Bill, 2021, now enacted as the Mediation act, 2023 explicitly contemplates “online mediation,” proposing institutional accreditation of virtual mediators and digital case‑management systems (Legal Affairs).

Legal provision(s) relating to ‘Online Dispute Resolution’

• Mediation act, 2023
  • Proposes a statutory framework for online mediation, including digital appointment of neutrals, e‑case management, and virtual hearings (Legal Affairs).

---

‘Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)’ as Defined in International Instruments

UNCITRAL Technical Notes on ODR (2016)

The most authoritative international articulation of Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) originates from the UNCITRAL Technical Notes on ODR (2016), which define ODR as " A mechanism for resolving disputes through the use of electronic communications and other information and communications technology.” This encompasses various methods such as negotiation, mediation, and arbitration—often used in hybrid combinations—and emphasizes impartiality, transparency, efficiency, due process, and security in digital environments.

OECD’s 2024 Online Dispute Resolution Framework

In alignment with this, the OECD’s 2024 Online Dispute Resolution Framework provides a more contemporary and operationally grounded definition. According to the OECD, ODR refers to "technology-enabled dispute resolution mechanisms that are accessible, affordable, fair, accountable and efficient,” particularly where such mechanisms “offer scalable resolution pathways embedded within digital platforms or government digital public infrastructure”. The OECD further stresses that ODR systems must be user-centric, inclusive, and designed to accommodate low-bandwidth environments to ensure digital equity across jurisdictions.

EU Regulation No 524/2013

Previously, EU Regulation No 524/2013 constituted a major regional initiative, establishing a pan-European platform for consumer ODR. It mandated the provision of “a single point of entry” for consumers and traders to resolve disputes stemming from cross-border online transactions without resorting to litigation, and imposed reporting obligations on providers and the European Commission. However, this regulation was formally repealed in 2024 via Regulation (EU) 2024/3228, citing inefficiencies, underutilization, and the need for more modernized, interoperable systems that better align with emerging digital dispute ecosystems.

UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (2006 amendment)

Lastly, the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration (2006 amendment) indirectly supports the integration of ODR by permitting parties to agree on digital procedures—such as electronic communication and virtual hearings—so long as these are consistent with the non-derogable provisions of the Model Law. While not expressly focused on ODR, this flexibility indicates an evolving international consensus toward recognizing and legitimizing digital dispute resolution mechanisms within traditional legal frameworks.

---

‘Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)’ as defined in official document(s)

NITI Aayog

In October 2021, NITI Aayog’s “Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India” characterized ODR as a “digitally enabled ADR mechanism” with a modular, multi‑tiered architecture—ranging from fully automated negotiation engines to assisted and hybrid processes—and recommended interoperability standards, capacity building, and public–private collaboration to mainstream ODR across sectors and courts. The E‑Courts Mission Mode Project (Ministry of Law & Justice) similarly promotes virtual courts, e‑filing, and digital case management, positioning ODR as a complementary module within the broader e‑justice ecosystem.

---

‘Online Dispute Resolution (ODR)’ as defined in official government report(s)

A Parliamentary Standing Committee on Personnel, Public Grievances, Law and Justice report (2020) observed that “ODR is not governed by any standalone legislation” but is enabled through existing ADR and IT statutes, and recommended coordinated awareness campaigns by law ministries and consumer affairs departments to promote “e‑ADR”.

Report A

NITI Aayog, “Designing the Future of Dispute Resolution: The ODR Policy Plan for India” : Outlines a three‑phase roadmap for ODR implementation—(1) pandemic‑related dispute backlog relief, (2) mainstreaming ODR for low‑value claims across public and private domains, and (3) establishing ODR as a default first port of call—backed by stakeholder consultations with leading jurists, bar associations, industry, and civil society.

---

Sectoral Applications of ODR in India

Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) is witnessing strategic adoption across multiple sectors in India as a response to mounting caseloads, rising costs of litigation, and increasing digitization of services. This section maps the integration of ODR across key industries such as digital governance, financial services, and capital markets, highlighting the progressive steps undertaken by both government and regulatory bodies.

Digital Transformation Initiatives

India’s push for digital transformation has prominently featured ODR as a key component. The Digital Lok Adalat, developed by NALSA has introduced AI-powered platforms for resolving high-volume, low-stakes disputes. This system is integrated with the eCourts platform, which facilitates real-time access to case data and documents through open APIs, ensuring interoperability between formal courts and digital mechanisms.

For example, the Gujarat State Legal Services Authority, in partnership with the Gujarat High Court, launched a state-level digital Lok Adalat using these tools, which reportedly processed over one million disputes. Similar initiatives have been adopted in Telangana, Odisha, and Chhattisgarh, in collaboration with the National Legal Services Authority (NALSA).

These developments are also aligned with the India Justice Report 2022,which recommends increased use of digital mechanisms and public-private partnerships to address judicial backlogs and access-to-justice gaps.

Securities Market

The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) has mandated the use of ODR mechanisms for disputes involving investors, stockbrokers, depository participants, and listed companies. In a circular dated July 31, 2023, SEBI directed Market Infrastructure Institutions (MIIs) to establish an institutionalized ODR mechanism, incorporating negotiation, conciliation, and online arbitration into investor grievance redressal processes.

A key initiative under this directive is the SMART ODR (Securities Market Approach for Resolution through Technology – ODR) platform, developed to address concerns regarding the accessibility and efficiency of grievance redress. The platform is expected to operate with integration across MIIs such as NSE, BSE, CDSL, and NSDL, thereby ensuring uniformity in procedures and digital documentation.

SEBI has also proposed interlinking the ODR platform with the SCORES portal, its centralized investor complaint tracking system, ensuring end-to-end digitization from grievance registration to resolution.

Banking and Financial Services

In the financial sector, the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has played a pivotal role in promoting the adoption of ODR. In its Statement on Developmental and Regulatory Policies dated August 6, 2020, the RBI acknowledged the growing volume of customer disputes in the digital payments ecosystem and announced the rollout of a centralized ODR mechanism for digital payments.

Under this directive, all payment system operators (PSOs) and system participants were required to implement ODR systems with automated grievance escalation, structured timelines, and data analytics for monitoring. Leading banks such as HDFC Bank, SBI, and ICICI have since adopted ODR modules to address disputes involving UPI failures, unauthorized transactions, and service delays.

In line with this regulatory push, the National Payments Corporation of India (NPCI) introduced the Unified Dispute and Issue Resolution (UDIR) system for platforms like IMPS and UPI. UDIR provides a real-time, API-driven interface for raising, tracking, and resolving complaints, enabling both remitter and beneficiary banks to respond more efficiently.

Complementing this, the PULSE Protocol (Protocol for Unified Legal Services)—designed by Agami and supported by the Omidyar Network India and ONI’s Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) framework—offers a secure, interoperable platform that enables real-time, multi-party resolution of disputes across the financial ecosystem. The protocol is built to work seamlessly with the digital infrastructure stack of India, such as Aadhaar, UPI, and DigiLocker, and aims to become the foundational layer for sector-agnostic dispute resolution in the future.

Other Developments and Ecosystem Trends

The Mediation Act, 2023 provides statutory backing to ODR by explicitly allowing pre-litigation mediation to be conducted through electronic means. This not only enhances the legitimacy of digital platforms but also creates opportunities for scaling them to handle commercial and civil disputes, especially for startups, MSMEs, and individual consumers.

Private entities are also contributing to the growth of the ecosystem. Platforms such as Presolv360, CADRE, and Sama are using AI-based tools to triage disputes, automate documentation, and manage workflows, thereby providing end-to-end digital dispute resolution services. These initiatives often work in tandem with industry stakeholders and regulators to pilot dispute protocols for sectors such as e-commerce, insurance, and logistics

PULSE protocol

The PULSE Protocol (Protocol for Unified Legal Services) represents a landmark innovation in the legal-tech space, aiming to create a digital public infrastructure (DPI) layer for dispute resolution in India. Developed by Agami in collaboration with the Beckn Protocol Foundation, the initiative is grounded in the principles of openness, interoperability, and decentralization. Its core vision is to enable fast, fair, and scalable dispute resolution through a networked digital ecosystem—mirroring the transformative success of platforms like UPI in the financial sector.

PULSE is not a standalone application or service; rather, it is a protocol—a set of rules, APIs, and data standards that allows different stakeholders to plug into a shared network while maintaining autonomy. It facilitates a standardized, discoverable, and modular system where disputing parties, resolution providers (e.g., mediators, arbitrators), and tech platforms can interact seamlessly. By enabling open and interoperable systems, PULSE avoids the pitfalls of siloed ODR platforms and enhances access to justice by ensuring that small claims, consumer grievances, and business-to-business disputes can be resolved digitally without high costs or delays.

One of the distinctive elements of PULSE is its commitment to a network-of-networks model, akin to how UPI created interoperability across banks. It does this by enabling an open network of ODR providers who can be discovered by parties on a digital platform, selected based on fit, and engaged through real-time, trackable digital channels. This drastically reduces transaction costs, increases trust, and allows for smart escalation paths—where disputes can automatically move from negotiation to mediation or arbitration as needed.

PULSE has already been integrated into pilot projects like the Digital Lok Adalat and used by private players such as Presolv360 and CADRE. The PUCAR (Protocols for Unified Conflict and Redressal) initiative further elaborates how the PULSE ecosystem can support decentralized redressal systems across various domains—banking, e-commerce, insurance, and even government-to-citizen services.

By offering open access to protocols and building on India’s existing DPI infrastructure (such as Aadhaar, DigiLocker, and UPI), PULSE promises to reshape dispute resolution from a siloed and paper-based system to a citizen-centric, data-driven, and scalable digital ecosystem. Its development marks a foundational step toward making justice as accessible and interoperable as digital payments.

---

Research that engages with ODR

Research on Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in India has expanded significantly in recent years, not merely supporting the idea of digital dispute mechanisms but actively shaping its architecture, critique, and policy roadmap. Various academic, policy, and practitioner-oriented works have moved beyond generic advocacy to engage critically with questions of institutional design, regulatory frameworks, user experience, and technological adaptation.

ODR Handbook by the Indian SME Chamber

The ODR Handbook published by the Indian SME Chamber offers one of the most comprehensive practitioner-facing engagements with ODR. Rather than presenting an abstract endorsement of technology-driven justice, it grounds the discussion in the practical realities of implementation for small and medium enterprises (SMEs). The Handbook details step-by-step adoption strategies for businesses, presents case studies on existing ODR platforms like Sama and Presolv360, and evaluates procedural efficiencies gained through automation. Its contribution lies in identifying how ODR can be integrated within current business models, emphasizing dispute prevention as much as resolution. It also stresses the need for regulatory clarity, a neutral technological backbone, and platform-level transparency to ensure the integrity of digital processe.

Agami ODR Initiative

The Agami ODR initiative reflects a different kind of engagement—an ecosystem-building intervention. Agami acts as a convener, bringing together platform developers, legal service providers, and public institutions to co-develop open standards and shared infrastructure. It highlights the importance of interoperability between private ODR platforms and the public justice system. Agami's role has been instrumental in piloting ODR in sectors like digital payments and microfinance, where speed, scale, and user simplicity are crucial. Its research focuses on interoperability, user-centered design, and modular dispute journeys that can be adopted at various stages of grievance redressal.

Vidhi Centre For Legal Policy's 2020 Report

Meanwhile, the Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy’s 2020 report offers a structurally grounded critique of ODR's scalability within India's legal framework. It does not simply list regulatory or constitutional concerns—it systematically examines the limitations of current legal provisions under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, Information Technology Act, and the CPC in enforcing ODR outcomes. For example, it questions the legal finality of platform-based consent agreements and proposes legislative amendments or judicial recognition to grant them binding effect. The report also tackles digital exclusion by analyzing demographic data and digital infrastructure gaps that prevent meaningful access to ODR for marginalized populations. It goes further to recommend safeguards like hybrid processes (combining online and offline modes) and digital literacy interventions. On the issue of quality control, Vidhi dissects the unregulated proliferation of private ODR providers and evaluates the risks posed by a lack of uniform procedural standards, transparency in algorithms, and audit mechanisms. It argues that the absence of such norms may undermine procedural fairness and erode public trust. The report thus doesn’t just identify challenges—it develops a differentiated model of ODR pathways that aligns procedural complexity with dispute typology, suggesting a public-private governance framework for implementation.

Leap Journal's 2021 Report

Similarly, The Leap Journal’s 2021 article engages with ODR not merely as a promising innovation but as a potential site of systemic imbalance in India's justice architecture. The article traces India’s ODR evolution alongside the country’s broader digital public infrastructure strategy (like Aadhaar and UPI), highlighting how state disengagement can create an over-reliance on private legal tech platforms. It engages normatively and empirically by critiquing the delegation of dispute resolution to actors who may not be bound by constitutional obligations of fairness, neutrality, or accountability. It also raises concerns about data governance, pointing out the lack of public safeguards around user privacy and platform bias, especially in automated or AI-driven dispute systems. The authors argue for a national public digital infrastructure for ODR, akin to a public utility model, that ensures due process through regulatory oversight, open APIs, and judicial review compatibility. This reflects a sophisticated engagement with institutional design questions, drawing on comparative insights from jurisdictions like the UK and Singapore, where the state plays an anchoring role in maintaining procedural justice even within private ODR ecosystems.

Additionally, the Indian SME Chamber’s ODR Handbook (2023) which was produced in collaboration with multiple stakeholders such as NITI AYYOG, Agami, Trilegal, ICICI Bank etc,   provides a detailed roadmap for integrating online dispute resolution mechanisms into India’s commercial and consumer legal ecosystem. It emphasizes the importance of standardized protocols, user-centric platforms, and multilingual interfaces to accommodate India’s diverse economic landscape, especially for MSMEs that often face high transaction costs and lack legal literacy. The Handbook underlines that ODR is not merely a digitized version of traditional ADR, but a comprehensive technological redesign that includes AI-based triage, automated case management systems, and asynchronous communication tools to reduce procedural inefficiencies and enhance trust in outcomes.

Furthermore, a systemic perspective on ODR is offered by the Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) initiative, which situates ODR as a crucial node in a larger digital governance architecture. According to DIAL Global, integrating ODR with grievance redressal mechanisms through interoperable APIs and Aadhaar-linked identities can bridge the accessibility gap between formal justice institutions and marginalized communities. DPI frameworks stress the role of public-private collaboration in building trust, ensuring data protection, and maintaining procedural fairness in digital justice environments .

Advantages of ODR

ODR’s primary advantage lies in cost‑effectiveness: by eliminating travel, lodging, and extensive legal formatting, it dramatically lowers dispute resolution expenses, making access to justice more inclusive for individuals and small businesses alike (Legal Service India, Quatro Hive). Closely tied is time efficiency—with automated scheduling, instant document exchange, and asynchronous communication, ODR can resolve routine disputes in days or weeks versus months or years in conventional courts. Geographical accessibility empowers parties in remote or underserved areas, provided they have internet access. Confidentiality is enhanced through secure platforms that restrict case details to authorized users, vital for sensitive matrimonial or commercial disputes. Additionally, environmental benefits accrue from reduced paper usage and lower carbon emissions from travel. By diverting appropriate cases from overburdened courts, ODR also helps alleviate judicial backlogs, allowing courts to focus on complex, high‑stakes litigation.

---

Disadvantages and Limitations of ODR

Despite its promise, ODR faces significant challenges. First, India’s persistent digital divide—with only 41.7% rural internet penetration versus 110% urban (as of September 2023)—excludes large populations lacking reliable connectivity or digital literacy (Wikipedia, The Times of India). Second, the absence of a dedicated legal framework leaves mediations and negotiated settlements without consistent enforceability; while arbitration awards under ODR are binding, mediated agreements require separate court ratification. Third, cybersecurity and data privacy concerns loom large as breaches or unauthorized access could expose sensitive personal or financial information. Fourth, the impersonality of digital interfaces limits mediators’ ability to read non‑verbal cues and build rapport, reducing confidence in the process. Trust deficits persist, as parties may question platform neutrality or fear algorithmic bias; likewise, language and cultural barriers can impair communication in India’s multilingual landscape. Finally, complex or criminal matters typically lie outside ODR’s scope, requiring in‑person procedures and procedural safeguards unavailable online.

---

Critical Perspectives and Emerging Issues

Beyond these pros and cons, deeper scrutiny reveals additional considerations. Algorithmic transparency is critical: ODR platforms relying on AI for case triage or draft recommendations must disclose logic to avoid opaque decision‑making that could perpetuate bias. Digital footprint management—retention, portability, and deletion of case records—raises concerns about long‑term privacy and data sovereignty. Interoperability protocols, as advocated by Agami’s ODR Handbook, are essential to avoid platform lock‑in and to allow consumers to migrate seamlessly between service providers. Moreover, the rise of gamification in ODR—using incentives and progress tracking to nudge settlement—must be designed ethically to prevent manipulation. These emerging issues underscore the need for multi‑stakeholder governance, combining technological safeguards, regulatory oversight, and civil‑society input to uphold procedural fairness and public trust (uncitral.un.org, Digital Impact Alliance).

---

Future Directions and Policy Recommendations

To realize ODR’s full potential in India, a dedicated statutory framework—either via amendments to ADR statutes or a standalone ODR Act—should codify enforceability standards, data protection norms, and accreditation requirements for providers. Capacity building is vital: investing in digital literacy programs (e.g., via Common Service Centres and BharatNet expansion) will narrow the access gap (Press Information Bureau). Adoption of a national ODR protocol, as proposed by NITI Aayog, would ensure discoverability (standardized APIs), interoperability (data portability), and security (consent‑based encryption). Public‑private partnerships can drive infrastructure development, platform certification, and user outreach, while courts should integrate ODR into e‑filing systems and establish clear referral mechanisms for suitable cases. Finally, exploratory pilots combining ODR with blockchain‑based smart contracts could automate award execution, further reducing enforcement delays and costs.

---

Conclusion

Online Dispute Resolution represents a transformative shift toward accessible, efficient, and sustainable justice delivery. India stands at a pivotal juncture: with robust digital infrastructure initiatives and a forward‑looking policy plan, it can harness global best practices to mainstream ODR. However, bridging the digital divide, enacting clear legal mandates, safeguarding data privacy, and fostering public trust remain essential prerequisites. A holistic strategy—encompassing legislation, technology standards, capacity building, and collaborative governance—will ensure that ODR augments India’s judicial framework, delivering on the promise of justice for all in the digital age.