Section 63 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Number of Conciliators

Section 63 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 specifies how many conciliators may conduct conciliation proceedings under Part III of the Act. The statutory default is one conciliator, unless the parties agree to appoint two or three conciliators.

Meaning of Section 63

Section 63 establishes a simple rule for the composition of the conciliation process. One conciliator is the statutory default. The parties may depart from that default by agreement and appoint either two or three conciliators.

The provision therefore gives priority to party autonomy while avoiding uncertainty where the parties have not specifically agreed upon the number of conciliators.

One conciliator is the default rule

Under Section 63(1), a conciliation is ordinarily conducted by a single conciliator. No separate agreement is needed to establish the one-conciliator model because it follows directly from the statute.

If the parties want more than one conciliator, they must agree to have either two or three. The provision does not provide for a panel of more than three conciliators.

Two or three conciliators by agreement

Parties may decide that the nature, value or complexity of their dispute makes a multi-member conciliation panel appropriate. Section 63 permits either two or three conciliators where the parties agree.

This flexibility may be useful where the dispute involves different technical, commercial or legal aspects, or where the parties prefer a broader panel for the settlement process.

Joint action where there is more than one conciliator

Section 63(2) states that where there is more than one conciliator, they ought, as a general rule, to act jointly. The purpose is to maintain a coordinated conciliation process rather than separate and potentially inconsistent processes conducted by individual conciliators.

How Section 63 works with Section 64

Section 63 determines the permissible number of conciliators. The next provision, Section 64 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, deals with the manner in which conciliators are appointed.

These provisions should therefore be read together: Section 63 answers how many conciliators may be appointed, while Section 64 addresses the appointment process.

Relation with commencement of conciliation proceedings

The number and appointment of conciliators arise within the broader statutory conciliation framework. Section 62 deals with commencement of conciliation proceedings, including the written invitation to conciliate and its written acceptance.

Key points under Section 63

• One conciliator is the statutory default.
• The parties may agree to appoint two conciliators.
• The parties may alternatively agree to appoint three conciliators.
• Where more than one conciliator is appointed, they should generally act jointly.
• The section reflects party autonomy while providing a clear default rule.
• Section 64 should be read with Section 63 for the procedure relating to appointment of conciliators.

Mediation Act, 2023 and Section 63

The Mediation Act, 2023 was enacted to establish a broader statutory framework for mediation. Its Section 61 and Sixth Schedule contemplate substitution of Sections 61 to 81 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

That amendment should not presently be represented as having removed Section 63 because Section 61 of the Mediation Act, 2023 has not been brought into force by the commencement notification presently applicable. The statutory text reproduced above therefore remains relevant as the current Section 63.

Related provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996

For the surrounding statutory framework, see Section 61 - Application and scope, Section 62 - Commencement of conciliation proceedings, Section 64 - Appointment of conciliators and Section 65 - Submission of statements to conciliator.

This page provides general legal information. For a specific dispute, the current statutory text, applicable commencement notifications and relevant judicial decisions should be checked before taking legal action.