Practice focus: Commercial Arbitration & Dispute Resolution

Why we Chose ADR (And Why We Still Litigate When It Matters) 

Dispute resolution doesn’t mean softening the blow. It means strengthening the solution. While arbitration widens the horizon, litigation is still the best solution given certain financial and emotional risk appetites. The win lies in the agility to select the best option fast enough not to lose that critical moment in time. 

Last year, we witnessed a founder duo caught in a vendor conflict where the contract prescribed arbitration. They’d never invoked it before. When the dispute escalated, they were eager to “follow process” and opted for arbitration, thinking it would be faster, quieter, and more founder-friendly.

It wasn’t.

The tribunal costs alone ran into six figures. Venue arrangements, arbitrator fees, document bundling - it all added up. Weeks passed with just procedural rounds. The other side was a larger company and had a full legal team and deep pockets. The founders, on the other hand, had urgency and limited runway.

Eventually, the founders pivoted. Timely legal assistance helped them withdraw, negotiate a direct settlement, and rebuild the contract terms for future clarity.

Lesson: ADR is not a shortcut. It’s a strategy. The method should serve the outcome. Not ego, not assumption.

1. A few years ago, we watched a Mumbai-based co-founder spiral into a bitter dispute with her former partner. The company was barely two years old. The fallout escalated quickly. Both sides were encouraged by advisors to “hold their ground” and “lawyer up.”

The result?

By the time they landed in court, the legal dispute had snowballed into reputational fallout.

Founders stopped returning her calls. Vendors delayed payments. Investors flagged “internal volatility.”

What could have been a 45-day mediated disengagement turned into an 18-month litigation spiral.

Why?

Because:

1.  no one paused to ask: What is the business trying to preserve: control, ownership, continuity, or closure?

2. No frameworks were laid down for how to communicate the dispute internally and externally.

3. No triage was done to assess how much of the conflict could be negotiated at a relational level before going adversarial.

4. And no one cautioned them on how public process timelines would trigger private market consequences.

By the time legal stepped in, it was about damage control.

Today, when founders come to us, our first step is to map what’s at stake - legally, reputationally, and commercially. We never assume that litigation is the default route. And if it is, we prepare for it with strategic containment and not emotional escalation.

Because it’s not just about who’s right. It’s about who survives the fallout.

2. Arbitration Gave Me Something Different - Not Better - Than Litigation

Litigation has its place. We appear in court regularly, and when the stakes demand assertion, there’s no substitute for it.

But arbitration gave me something litigation doesn’t always allow: strategic influence.

In court, lawyers present. In ADR, lawyers can help shape the solution. We discovered that we could sometimes do far more for our clients when we had the ability to pace the process, control the tone, and anticipate psychological flashpoints.

In one matter between a Delhi logistics company and its overseas freight partner, it became clear both sides were posturing in emails- but privately, they wanted the relationship to survive.

We used a hybrid path: arbitration for the core commercial breach, mediation for the communications trail.

The final award? Lean, enforceable, and surprisingly, cordial.

The real win? They continued working together after that.

It’s not about which forum is superior. It’s about knowing which one to use when, and how.

3. Time Was the Real Currency

The biggest cost of conflict isn’t always the lawyer’s fee. It’s the emotional and calendar bandwidth lost.

An SME client was once stuck for three years in a shareholder dispute that started over WhatsApp and ended in court. They’d spent over Rs 1 crore in fees across jurisdictions. The founder noted in hindsight: “If someone had helped us talk properly in the first 90 days, I wouldn’t have lost 2 co-founders and my Series A.”

ADR isn’t always the right answer. But when it works, it gives back something litigation rarely does. And that is control.

4. Judges Have Limited Time. I am a bit more available.

The Delhi High Court had a particularly busy board that day.

Our matter came up three hours late. The judge asked for a summary in 30 seconds. My client, visibly frustrated, whispered to me: “We’ve waited nine months for this — and it’s over in half a minute?”

That’s not the judge’s fault. But it revealed something systemic. As counsel, I often have 6–8 hours to prepare. A judge might get 3 minutes.

In ADR, I can give the case the attention it deserves. I can hold the complexity, not collapse it into urgency.

5.Not Every Dispute Needs a Court. But Not Every Dispute Needs Arbitration Either.

There’s a growing tendency to glorify ADR as a gentler, faster alternative to litigation.

But the truth is: alternative doesn’t always mean better - especially for early-stage startups.

Arbitration, for instance, can be expensive. Arbitrator fees, venue costs, and procedural delays often make it less than ideal for smaller disputes. In such cases, smart negotiation or even decisive litigation may offer better clarity and speed.

I’ve helped:

• Healthcare providers resolve payment issues through structured negotiation

• Co-founders exit gracefully using pre-litigation strategies

• Family-run businesses avoid reputational damage through quiet facilitation

The key isn’t the forum. It’s the outcome.

Litigation has its place. When it’s the right tool, I litigate with full conviction.

But I also believe in preventing unnecessary escalation — and that’s where early strategic legal guidance makes all the difference.

Whether I’m helping a founder navigate a breaking point, or advising a company on how not to burn bridges with a vendor, I focus on aligning dispute resolution with business continuity — not just legal finality.