India is witnessing a juridical and cultural turning point. What was once an alternative — mediation as a soft, discretionary method to settle disputes — is now being woven into statutory architecture, institutional practice, and national policy. The Mediation Act, 2023, has not only codified mediation’s legitimacy but has put in motion structural reforms that make mediated settlements predictable, enforceable and scalable. If businesses, governments and legal professionals treat this moment as incremental change, they will miss a revolution that’s already underway.
The Mediation Act, 2023 (notified in the Gazette in September–October 2023) is an inflection point. The Act aims to promote institutional mediation, enable online and community mediation, set up registration frameworks for mediators, and “crucially” provide statutory routes to make mediated settlement agreements enforceable in the same manner as court decrees. This legal scaffolding moves mediation from “good practice” to a recognized, enforceable dispute-resolution pathway.
The sectional design in the Act targets two bottlenecks that historically limited mediation’s uptake: (1) uncertainty about the enforceability of mediated outcomes; and (2) a lack of standardized professional infrastructure for mediators and institutions. By addressing both, the law substantially lowers transaction costs and legal risk for parties choosing mediated settlement. Legal commentary and practice notes have emphasized the Act’s role in creating certainty around institutional and cross-border mediation conduct.
Numbers already point to a surge in mediation activity. States and institutional mediation centres are reporting tens of thousands of mediated cases annually — with many centres achieving settlement rates that rival or exceed court timelines for resolution. For instance, consolidated annual statistics from State mediation centres reflect significant volumes of cases and meaningful settlement ratios, highlighting both latent demand and deployed capacity. Meanwhile, civil and commercial judiciary initiatives (and periodic national mediation drives) are diverting suitable matters to mediation on a scale previously unseen.
The supply side — qualified mediators and institutional capacity — remains the limiting factor. Surveys and expert voices within the Indian ADR ecosystem repeatedly call for a large-scale investment in accredited mediator training and registries. The gap between cases amenable to mediation and accredited professionals suggests an urgent skills and accreditation campaign is needed to realize the Act’s promise.
For corporations and in-house legal teams, the implications are threefold:
1. Predictability and enforceability: Enforceable mediated settlements reduce post-settlement litigation risk and reduce capital tied up in protracted disputes. This creates a more stable legal environment for commercial planning.
2. Cost and time efficiency: Mediation dramatically shortens dispute timelines and lowers legal spend when compared to full-scale litigation — an especially important factor for cross-border and tech-driven commercial ecosystems.
3. Reputation and relationship preservation: Settlements by design preserve business relationships, reduce public exposure, and allow parties to craft creative remedies — outcomes often impossible in adversarial trials.
For an organization operating transnationally, embedding mediation-friendly clauses, building in-house ADR competencies, and partnering with accredited institutions offers strategic advantages: faster dispute resolution, lower operational interruption, and a governance-friendly approach to commercial conflict.
Legislative recognition is necessary but not sufficient. Quality control — through accredited training, registries, ethical codes and institutional standards — will determine whether mediation scales with integrity. The Indian Institute of Corporate Affairs (IICA), among others, is already offering structured mediation certification programs aimed at producing practitioners skilled in both facilitative practice and cross-cultural commercial contexts. Wider adoption of such programs will be critical to building the mediator cadre India needs.
Online mediation — explicitly anticipated by the Act — is another game-changer. It democratises access, reduces costs and accelerates scheduling. For a geographically dispersed business landscape in Asia, hybrid and virtual mediation modes will be indispensable to mainstreaming the process.
Challenges remain: inertia in litigation-first mindsets, uneven institutional capacity across States, and the immediate shortage of qualified mediators. Overcoming these requires coordinated public–private action: courts and legislatures nudging pre-institution mediation pathways; corporations adopting mediation clauses and dispute boards; and legal education integrating mediation skills into mainstream curricula.
Practically, companies should pilot mediation clauses in new contracts, sponsor mediator training for legal teams, and create internal mediation workflows that align with the statutory framework. For policy-makers and ADR institutions, rapid expansion of accredited training, standardized mediator registers and public awareness campaigns will turn legislative promise into everyday practice.
If the Mediation Act, 2023, is the spark, then practitioners and progressive organisations must become the fuel. As a trainee certified mediator and as a legal practitioner at SAS, I see a once-in-a-generation opportunity: to build dispute-resolution systems that are faster, fairer, and more aligned with commercial reality. Those who act now — training mediators, revising contract playbooks, and institutionalising mediation pathways — will lead the next wave of legal and commercial efficiency in India and across Asia.
Mediation is not merely an alternative; it’s an operational and strategic imperative for the future. The present is brewing the future — and that future is arriving faster than many imagine. Embrace it. Train for it. Design for it.
About the author: Digish Rawal is the Head of Legal at SAS (Asia-Pacific). He is a Trainee Certified Mediator, IICA.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author. The opinions presented do not necessarily reflect the views of Bar & Bench.
If you would like your Deals, Columns, Press Releases to be published on Bar & Bench, please fill in the form available here.