With an arising need, a ‘demand’ is paved. Consequently, to a demand, comes a development. The development, in this case answers the calls of multiple developers who required a platform to be constructed to answer their demands as well as their issues be picked and resolved through a government machinery. The newly structured mechanism, termed as ‘Dispute Resolution Mechanism’ (“D.R.M”) was discussed at length in June and notified through an orders in September, 2019 by Ministry of New and Renewable Energy (“MNRE”) The need arose from the power distribution companies facing massive losses arising out of high tariffs being charged by the solar/wind developers. This was supplemented by a prominent need to strike and bring upon an adjudicating body to resolve issues between the parties, including, the various developers and the Solar Energy Corporation of India (SECI) and National Thermal Power Corporation (NTPC). The Framework elaborates on how the authorities are bound to proceed and enunciates a hierarchy to be followed in the line of adjudication.
This article focuses on distinguishing between the ‘seat’ of arbitration and the ‘venue’ of arbitration through judicial precedents. It also comments on the legality and validity of two Indian parties electing a foreign seat of arbitration. Furthermore, the 2015 Amendment in the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with respect to interim relief is elaborated.