Name: shams Arafat Rifat

ID:192-26-1475

In India the origin of ADR could be traced to the origin of political institutions.  And trade and commerce.  It is observed from the historical document, that ADR in the name of dispute resolution institutions prevalent during the ancient period. It was reported that resolution of disputes between members of a particular clan or acceptor or between members of a particular locality, by kolas assembly of the members of a clan, sirens guild of a particular occupation and pug as (neighborhood assemblies). In rural India panchayat  decided almost all disputed between the inhabitants of the village, which disputes between the members of a clan continued to be decided by the elders of the clan.

 One of the main characteristics of the traditional institutions is that they were recognized as a system of administration of justice and not merely “alternatives” to the formal justice system established by the sovereign the feudal lords kais, the adalat system introduced by the then ruling group and the existing court system. The two systems continued to operate parallels to each other.

 It is pertinent to say that the procedure and the nature of preceding these institutions were very much similar to the ADR. This was also applicable to this country because it was the part of the India.

 (2)The formal system of administration of justice introduced during British rule replaced the old system of dispensing justice through feudal set-up. But the traditional institutions continue to play their role of dispute resolution though not known by their old name. As because we still have disputes between members of a clan.