Gujarat AG Kamal Trivedi: Urges Ad Hoc Arbitration Re-look

• Gujarat Advocate General Kamal Trivedi advocates for a complete re-evaluation of India's Arbitration Act.
• Trivedi believes the Act's undefined terms lead to extensive Supreme Court jurisprudence and intervention.
• He expressed a strong sentiment that ad hoc arbitration should be phased out entirely.
• These views were shared during an interview at the GHAC Arbitration Week 2026.
• Discussions also covered strict arbitration timelines, government reluctance in arbitration, and developing GIFT City as a global arbitration center.

Advocate General Trivedi's call for a legislative "re-look" stems from his observation that the existing Arbitration Act contains numerous undefined terms and expressions.

Kamal B. Trivedi, the distinguished Advocate General for the State of Gujarat, has voiced a compelling argument for a comprehensive overhaul of India's arbitration framework. Trivedi, who holds the rare distinction of serving continuously for two decades in his current role, assumed the position of Advocate General on April 25, 2006, following a tenure as Additional Advocate General. His illustrious career began after topping Gujarat University in his LL.B. in 1977, building on a Science degree with distinction from 1974 and a Master’s in Personnel Management & Labour Welfare. He joined the Bar in 1977 and also contributed as a visiting faculty member at institutions like Sir LA Shah Law College.

During an interview with Neha Joshi of Bar & Bench at the recent GHAC Arbitration Week 2026, Trivedi articulated his strong conviction that the Arbitration Act requires a "complete re-look." His remarks underscored a critical perspective on the current state of dispute resolution in India, particularly highlighting the deficiencies of ad hoc arbitration. Beyond legislative reform, the discussions also encompassed the necessity of adhering to strict arbitration timelines, addressing the reluctance of government entities to engage in arbitration, and the strategic vision for transforming GIFT City into a prominent global arbitration hub.

Advocate General Trivedi's call for a legislative "re-look" stems from his observation that the existing Arbitration Act contains numerous undefined terms and expressions. This statutory ambiguity, he contends, has inadvertently led to the Supreme Court developing extensive jurisprudence to interpret and clarify these vague provisions. Such judicial intervention, while necessary in the absence of clear legislative guidance, ultimately contributes to delays and uncertainty within the arbitration process, which Trivedi believes should be minimized.

His perspective suggests that a more precisely worded statute would reduce the need for judicial interpretation, thereby streamlining arbitral proceedings and enhancing their efficiency. This sentiment is particularly pronounced in his views on ad hoc arbitration, which he implies should be phased out entirely. Trivedi's argument is that a robust, institutionally-backed arbitration system, underpinned by clear legal definitions, would better serve the interests of justice and promote India as a reliable destination for dispute resolution, moving away from less structured ad hoc arrangements.

The insights shared by Gujarat Advocate General Kamal Trivedi carry significant weight for the future trajectory of Indian arbitration reform. His advocacy for a clearer, more definitive Indian Arbitration Act aligns with broader efforts to enhance the country's appeal as an international arbitration destination, particularly through initiatives like the development of GIFT City. By addressing the legislative ambiguities that currently invite extensive court intervention, India could foster a more predictable and efficient arbitration environment, thereby strengthening its position on the global stage.

Trivedi's emphasis on strict arbitration timelines and his concern over government reluctance to utilize arbitration also point to crucial areas for systemic improvement. Overcoming these challenges, alongside a potential shift away from ad hoc arbitration towards more institutionalized mechanisms, could fundamentally reshape how disputes are resolved in India. These discussions, emerging from platforms like GHAC Arbitration Week 2026, highlight an ongoing dialogue among legal luminaries about refining India's dispute resolution landscape to meet contemporary demands.

Lawyers practicing arbitration in India should note the strong sentiment from the Gujarat Advocate General against ad hoc arbitration, signaling a potential push towards institutional arbitration and legislative reform of the Arbitration Act. This could influence future dispute resolution clauses, strategies, and the overall landscape of arbitration practice in India, requiring practitioners to stay updated on policy discussions and potential statutory amendments.

Source: Original reporting via Bar & Bench