All about statements of claim and defence in Arbitration – Part 1 

In arbitration, your case begins, and often ends, with how well you draft your statement of claim or defence. They are the foundation upon which the entire arbitration process stands. In this first part of our three-part series, we walk through the essential elements every lawyer must understand before drafting arbitration pleadings. 

Introduction

I still remember the first time I was asked to draft a statement of claim for an arbitration. It was a quiet Thursday evening in my senior’s chamber. Papers lay scattered on the desk, coffee going cold in the corner, and I sat staring at the screen, wondering where to begin.

My senior, Mr. Mohit M, leaned over and smiled.

“Do not get lost in the facts,” he said. “The statement of claim is not a dumping ground for every detail. It is the story of your client’s grievance. Tell it well, tell it right, or the tribunal will not listen.”

That sentence stayed with me, because unlike court litigation, where you may file multiple affidavits, replies, and written submissions, arbitration gives you only a few key moments to shape the tribunal’s mind. And your statement of claim or defence is the first of those moments. If you get it wrong here, it is hard to recover later.

Why does this matter so much today? Because arbitration in India has transformed. It is no longer as rare as it once was. Start-ups, family businesses, large corporations, everyone includes arbitration clauses these days. And once the dispute arises, your pleadings are technical documents, and act as the roadmap, the pitch, the entire foundation on which the arbitral tribunal will build its understanding of the case.

But here is the twist and something I wish I had when I sat in that chamber, today you have help that we never dreamed of. Artificial Intelligence.

Yes, AI is changing how we draft legal documents. It can suggest arguments, check gaps, find precedents, and even offer structure to your claim or defence. But how much can you rely on it? Where does your own judgement come in? And what about the strict requirements of Indian arbitration law?

That is exactly why I am writing this three-part guide.

In this first part, let us slow down and understand the essentials of what arbitration really means in India, what makes a statement of claim or defence strong or weak, and what mistakes many lawyers make without realising it.

In the second and third parts, we will explore the exciting bit, how you can practically use AI tools to draft better, faster and smarter, while staying within the boundaries of law and good sense.

By the time you are done reading this series, you will be better prepared than I was on that long-ago Thursday, and armed with tools we could only imagine back then.

What is arbitration, and why is it preferred in India?

I remember a client meeting that changed the way I thought about dispute resolution. It was a small but fast-growing tech company from Bengaluru. Their founder, Mr Vasu, sat across the table, looking anxious.

“We have fallen out with our vendor,” he said. “They missed deadlines, delivered poor quality, and now they are demanding full payment. But I do not want to go to court. I cannot afford five years of litigation.”

That was when we explained arbitration to him.

“Think of arbitration as a private court that you and the other side have chosen in advance,” I said. “No crowded courtrooms. No endless adjournments. A process that can be as quick or as flexible as both parties allow. It is essentially a consensual, binding dispute resolution mechanism governed by the parties’ agreement and the 1996 Act, distinct from judicial proceedings.”

His eyes lit up. “So we could solve this quietly, without ruining our reputation or burning more money?”

Exactly. And that, in essence, is why arbitration has become the preferred way of resolving commercial disputes in India.

Under Indian law, specifically the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, arbitration offers a legally binding and enforceable alternative to traditional court litigation. The law has been amended several times to make India a more attractive place for arbitration. The aim is simple: make it faster, more efficient, and less painful than going to court.

But there is more to it than speed.

Arbitration gives parties the freedom to choose:

• The arbitrator: whether it’s a subject-matter expert, a senior advocate, or even a retired judge.
• The procedure: from strict, court-like rules to more flexible and faster processes.
• The place, language, and governing law: This can be crucial when the parties come from different countries or regions.

And there is another advantage, confidentiality. Court cases are public records, but arbitration stays private. For businesses that want to protect trade secrets or avoid bad press, this is a blessing.

Whether you are handling a dispute between two family-run firms in Chennai or a cross-border supply agreement between an Indian exporter and a foreign buyer, arbitration allows you to shape the process far more than courts do.

But, and this is where many young lawyers slip, arbitration is not a lawless free-for-all. It runs on strict principles, party agreements, and the framework of the 1996 Act. And at its heart lies one simple truth: what you plead at the start, in your claim or defence, will decide the shape of your entire case.

Before we get to how to draft these documents, you must understand the journey of arbitration itself. Because if you do not grasp what arbitration really is, you will not see why your statement of claim or defence matters so much.

Basic procedure of arbitration under Indian law

A few months after that meeting with Mr Vasu, his dispute with the vendor officially turned into an arbitration. I remember sitting with him, explaining what would happen next. He looked surprised.

“I thought arbitration meant just one hearing and done,” he said with a hopeful smile.

“It is simpler than court, yes. But it still follows a process. Miss a step, and your case could suffer. Let me walk you through it.”

And I explained, just like I will explain to you now, how arbitration in India usually unfolds.

1. First comes the notice of arbitration. 

This is the first step, a notice invoking arbitration, as per section 21. This is the formal letter that one party sends to the other, saying, “Let us resolve this by arbitration as per our contract.” It is a simple but powerful trigger. Without this notice, arbitration cannot begin.

2. Sometimes, the court refers parties to arbitration.

Before any formal steps begin, courts can refer parties to arbitration if the contract has an arbitration clause. This happens under section 8, ensuring disputes are resolved privately, not through court litigation. This is especially common when one party tries to initiate a suit despite having agreed to arbitrate.

3. Next is the appointment of the arbitrator or arbitrators. 

The contract may already mention who the arbitrator will be, perhaps a retired judge or a senior industry expert. If not, the parties must agree on one. Sometimes, each party picks one arbitrator, and the two of them pick a third. This is called a three-member tribunal.

If there’s no agreement, or if one party is not happy with the arbitrator appointed, then the party can apply to the High Court or Supreme Court to appoint an arbitrator under section 11. After the 2019 Amendment, this appointment can be made not just by the court, but also by a designated arbitral institution chosen by the Supreme Court or High Court. However, courts still verify the existence of a valid arbitration agreement before making or referring the appointment.

Once the tribunal is set, a preliminary hearing usually takes place. This is where timelines, procedures, and practical details are settled how documents will be filed, how long each party gets to argue, and whether hearings will be online or in person.

4. The filing of the statement of claim and statement of defence. 

Here comes the real action. Section 23 governs this. These are the backbone documents of arbitration. The claimant files their statement of claim first, laying out all the facts, issues, legal points, and reliefs sought. The other side files the statement of defence in reply, sometimes adding a counterclaim of their own. Generally, the proceedings are conducted in writing, unless the arbitral tribunal considers oral hearings to be essential.

5. Exchange of evidence documents, witness statements, and expert reports. 

In some cases, there are oral hearings, where witnesses are cross-examined and lawyers argue the case before the tribunal.

1. Section 24 – Hearings and written proceedings

Covers the conduct of oral hearings and allows the tribunal to decide whether the proceedings will be documentary or oral.

2. Section 26 – Expert appointed by the arbitral tribunal

Allows the tribunal to appoint experts and require parties to provide information or documents.

3. Section 27 – Court assistance in taking evidence

If necessary, the tribunal or a party (with tribunal approval) can request the court’s help in collecting evidence.

6. Verdict, arbitral award

Finally, after all the pleadings, arguments and evidence, the tribunal delivers its verdict, the arbitral award. This decision is binding, just like a court decree. If a party refuses to obey it, the other can enforce it through the courts.

Section 31 covers the form and contents of arbitral award. It sets out the rules for how the award must be written, signed, and reasoned. Section 32 covers termination of proceedings. The arbitral proceedings formally end with the final award

But here is what most clients and even some young lawyers forget. The success or failure of your entire case often depends on what you put into that first statement of claim or defence. If your pleadings are weak, confused or incomplete, no amount of clever cross-examination can save you later. The tribunal will only look at what you framed at the start.

7. Request for correction/clarification

If a party finds clerical, typographical, or calculation errors in the award or needs interpretation of a specific part, they can apply for modification under section 33. The time limit to seek a correction, interpretation, or additional award under section 33 is 30 days from the date of receipt of the arbitral award.

8. Reminder: Settlement is still possible 

At any stage, parties can settle the matter. If they do, the arbitrator can record the terms in the form of a consent award under section 30, which is treated like any other arbitral award and is enforceable.

That is why understanding this basic process matters. Because when you draft your claim or defence, as we will explore soon, you are setting the path for everything that follows.

 What is a statement of claim?

A week after the preliminary hearing in Mr Vasu’s arbitration, he called me, sounding puzzled.

“Why is this statement of claim so important? Is it not just another legal formality? Can we not simply send them all our emails and invoices and let the tribunal see the truth for itself?”

Many clients think this way. But here is what I told him and what you must remember too.

The statement of claim is not a bundle of documents. It is your story, carefully crafted, legally sound, and designed to persuade the tribunal. It is the first and best chance to set the stage for your case. If you lose the tribunal’s attention or confuse the issues here, it is very hard to fix later.

Under section 23 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the claimant, the party bringing the dispute, must submit this document. And what must it contain?

Let me break it down the way I explained to Mr Vasu, sitting across his cluttered office desk.

1. Introduction: First, you introduce the parties. Who are you? Who is on the other side? Are you a company, a partnership, or an individual? Where are you based? This is where you set the scene.
2. Brief background: Next comes a brief background. This is where you tell the tribunal what the relationship between the parties was, for example, a supply agreement, a franchise deal, or a software services contract. You give just enough context to make the dispute understandable.
3. Cause of action: Then you lay out the cause of action, the heart of your grievance. What did the other party do wrong? Did they breach a clause of the contract? Did they fail to deliver goods? Did they act in bad faith? This part must be crystal clear. Vague accusations or emotional language will not help you here.
4. Relief: Now comes the reliefs claimed, what you want the tribunal to grant you. Is it the payment of outstanding invoices? Damages for breach? Specific performance of a contract term? You must state this plainly and precisely. Tribunals do not like guessing what the claimant wants.
5. Legal basis: Finally, you state the legal basis of your claim. Which contract clauses, laws or principles support your case? You cannot rely on sympathy. Your claim must stand on solid legal ground, and you must show this clearly.

When I explained this to Mr Vasu, he leaned back, thoughtful.

“So the tribunal decides the case based on this document, and the other side replies to it in their defence?”

Exactly. The statement of claim frames the whole arbitration. It tells the tribunal: these are the facts, these are the disputes, this is what I want, and here is why I am entitled to it under law and contract.

If you miss facts here, you may not be allowed to introduce them later. If you forget a relief, you may lose the chance to claim it. That is why this document must be complete, clear and convincing.

What is a statement of defence?

A few days after we filed Mr Vasu’s statement of claim, the vendor’s lawyer called me.

“We have received your client’s claim. Our defence is almost ready. Expect a detailed reply.”

Mr Vasu overheard this and frowned. “What can they possibly say in defence? The facts are clear, right? They failed to deliver on time. What defence could they possibly have?”

Every client thinks their case is bulletproof. But in arbitration, just like in court, the other side always has a chance to speak. And that chance comes in the form of the statement of defence.

Under section 23 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the respondent, the party defending against the claim, must submit this document. It is not optional. Even silence counts as a response, and silence can be costly. If the respondent fails to submit a statement of defence without sufficient cause, the tribunal may proceed ex parte, treating the absence as a lack of defence.

So what goes into a good statement of defence? I explained this to Mr Vasu over tea, knowing that even the strongest claims can stumble if the defence is clever.

1. Preliminary objections: First, the respondent may raise preliminary objections. These are serious points, not about the facts of the case, but about the tribunal’s power to hear the matter at all. The respondent might say, “This dispute is not arbitrable,” or “The tribunal has no jurisdiction because of XYZ.” If they do not raise such objections early, they lose the right to bring them later.
2. Responses: Next comes the point-by-point response to the statement of claim. This is where the respondent admits, denies, or qualifies each fact stated by the claimant. For example:

• “Paragraph 5 is admitted to the extent that a contract was signed, but denied insofar as the delivery schedule is concerned.”
• Or: “Paragraph 9 is denied. The respondent did not refuse delivery; the claimant failed to provide necessary specifications.”

3. Grounds of defence: After that, the respondent lays out their own factual and legal grounds of defence. This is their version of the story. Maybe the delay was caused by the claimant. Maybe payment was withheld lawfully. Maybe there was a force majeure event. This is their chance to explain why they did not breach the contract or why the claimant’s interpretation of the contract is wrong.

But there is more. The respondent can also file a counterclaim, their own claim against the claimant. For example, they might say: “Not only did we not breach the contract, but the claimant owes us damages for wrongful termination.”

If this happens, the claimant must then file a reply to the counterclaim, and the cycle of pleadings continues.

When I finished explaining, Mr Vasu sighed.

“So the defence is like their chance to break or twist our case?”

I nodded. “Yes, and if they do it well, the tribunal may start doubting your claim. That is why your initial statement of claim must be strong, and their defence must be carefully studied when it arrives.”

In short, the statement of defence is the respondent’s shield and sometimes their sword, if they add a counterclaim. It shapes the tribunal’s view as much as the claim itself.

Key legal principles to remember while drafting claim and defence

A few days after the vendor filed their statement of defence, I sat down with Mr Vasu to review it. He was restless, flipping pages.

“This is all technicality, is it not?” he said. “Surely the tribunal will see the truth and decide in our favour?”

“No, no.”, I said. “Vasu, arbitration does not run on instinct or fairness alone. There are legal principles that every tribunal follows principles which shape how your claim and their defence are read. If you forget these, no matter how good your facts are, your case could slip.”

Let me share these principles with you because they are what every good arbitration pleading must respect.

1. Competence-competence: The first is the principle of competence-competence. This simply means that the tribunal has the power to decide its own jurisdiction. If the other side claims, “This dispute cannot be arbitrated,” the tribunal itself will rule on that. So if you have jurisdictional objections to raise in your defence, you must raise them early, or you lose the right to object later.
2. Autonomy: The second is party autonomy. In arbitration, the parties control the process to a large extent; they pick the tribunal, they pick the rules, and they even pick the law sometimes. Your pleadings must respect this autonomy. If the contract says disputes will be resolved under ICC or SIAC rules, or under English law, you cannot ignore that. Your claim or defence must fit within what the parties agreed.
3. Procedural rules: The third is strict adherence to procedural rules. These rules might come from the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, or from the institution (like MCIA or LCIA), or from what the parties decided in their contract. If the rules say your claim must include all documents relied upon, or that the defence must be filed within 30 days, you must follow that. Otherwise, your claim or defence could be struck down no matter how strong your case.
4. Evidence: The fourth is the admissibility and relevancy of evidence. The tribunal will not waste time on documents that are irrelevant or on arguments that have nothing to do with the dispute. So when you draft your claim or defence, focus sharply on what matters to the case. Cut the rest.
5. Disclosure: The fifth is the duty of disclosure. If there are documents or facts you must reveal, you cannot hide them. The tribunal expects fairness and honesty. Surprise documents dropped at the last minute will not be welcomed unless the rules allow it.
6. Good faith: And finally, the requirement of good faith. Indian arbitration law, like most international systems, expects parties to act in good faith. If you distort facts, make frivolous claims, or try to mislead the tribunal, your case could collapse and you could be penalised with costs.

When I finished explaining these, Mr Vasu leaned back, looking thoughtful.

“So it is not just about telling my story,” he said. “It is about telling it the right way under these principles.”

“Exactly,” I said. “A good statement of claim or defence is not just convincing, it is legally correct, fair, complete and precise.”

Keep these principles in mind when you draft your pleadings or when you ask AI tools to help you, as we will see later. These rules apply, no matter how clever the technology.

Time frames under Indian arbitration law

“I am assuming that we need to stick to a timeline, right?” Vasu questioned.

“We should. Timelines play a crucial role in ensuring that arbitration proceedings remain efficient and effective. The act actually lays down specific time limits, particularly for domestic arbitration, to reduce delays and promote the timely resolution of disputes. The following is a detailed overview of the key time frames that parties and arbitral tribunals must adhere to under Indian law.”

1. Completion of arbitration 

Domestic arbitration:

Section 29A stipulates that the arbitral tribunal must render its final award within twelve months from the date of completion of pleadings. It is important to note that this period does not commence from the date of appointment of the arbitrator, but from the date on which pleadings are concluded.

• The parties may, by mutual consent, extend the time period by a further six months, thereby allowing a total of up to eighteen months from the date of completion of pleadings.
• Any extension beyond eighteen months must be granted by the competent court, upon an application filed under section 29A(5).
• If the court does not grant an extension, the mandate of the arbitral tribunal shall terminate automatically.

International commercial arbitration:

Section 29A does not prescribe a strict twelve-month time limit for international commercial arbitration. However, the Act encourages expeditious disposal of such cases. In practice, courts may fix time limits for the conclusion of proceedings if the need arises, especially where significant delays are observed.

2. Filing of pleadings 

Section 23(4) mandates that the statement of claim, defence, and any counterclaims must be filed within six months from the date the arbitrators receive notice of their appointment.

This six-month period includes the exchange of:

• Statement of claim by the claimant;
• Statement of defence by the respondent (including any counterclaims);
• Reply to counterclaims, if any.

This statutory timeline ensures that the initial stages of arbitration proceed without undue delay. It forms the basis for the commencement of the twelve-month clock for the final award under section 29A.

3. Other procedural timelines (usually set in the preliminary hearing)

While the Act does not prescribe rigid timelines for every stage of arbitration, several procedural aspects are typically discussed and scheduled during the preliminary hearing or first procedural meeting. These include:

• Time limits for the production of documents, including requests and objections;
• Deadlines for submitting witness statements and expert reports, where applicable;
• Dates for oral hearings, including examination and cross-examination of witnesses;
• Time permitted for post-hearing written submissions.

Such timelines are generally agreed upon between the parties and the arbitral tribunal or may be directed by the tribunal itself, depending on the complexity of the matter.

4. Correction or interpretation of the arbitral award 

Section 33 provides parties with an opportunity to seek a correction or interpretation of the award after it has been delivered. This is an optional post-award step and must be initiated within a strict time frame. 

A party may, within thirty days from the date of receipt of the arbitral award, request the tribunal to correct any computational, clerical, or typographical errors; or provide an interpretation of a specific part of the award, if so agreed by the parties.

The tribunal, if it finds the request justified, shall make the correction or provide the interpretation within thirty days from receipt of the request.

In some instances, the arbitral tribunal may, on its own initiative, correct any such errors within thirty days of the date of the award.

Role of institutional rules in shaping claim and defence

Just when Mr Vasu thought he understood everything about arbitration pleadings, he surprised me with another question.

“Wait… what about these institutional rules you mentioned the other day? ICC… SIAC… MCIA… are they important? Or do we just follow the Arbitration Act?”

A very good question. And one that many young lawyers forget to ask.

I pulled out a folder from the shelf and laid out three rulebooks in front of him: ICC Rules, SIAC Rules, and the MCIA Rules.

“Look at these,” I said. “If you agree to institutional arbitration, and many modern contracts do, these rules become part of the process. You cannot ignore them when you draft your claim or defence.”

For example, under the ICC Rules, your statement of claim must include not just facts and reliefs, but also specific documents and evidence. If you miss this, the ICC tribunal may send your claim back for correction, wasting time and money.

Under the SIAC Rules, there are tight timelines. You may have to file your defence within 14 or 21 days of receiving the notice. If you delay, you could lose the chance to argue jurisdiction or submit a counterclaim.

The MCIA Rules, designed for Indian and cross-border disputes, also insist that the statement of claim must clearly state the nature of the dispute, the legal grounds, and all reliefs sought. Vague or incomplete pleadings are not tolerated.

“But what if we are doing ad hoc arbitration?” Mr Vasu asked. “No institution involved?”

“Then you fall back entirely on the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, plus whatever the parties agreed in the contract,” I replied. “But even then, the same principles apply: clarity, completeness, legal basis. The tribunal will not allow confusion, whether in ad hoc or institutional arbitration.”

Some institutional rules also allow you to seek emergency relief or make quick decisions on jurisdiction. If your claim or defence involves such issues, you must know what the rules allow.

Important to note that emergency arbitration is not enforceable under the 1996 Act in India (as held in Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC v. Future Retail Ltd., 2021). Emergency arbitrator orders are binding only contractually, not statutorily, in India.

“And do these rules ever override the Arbitration Act?” he asked.

“No, not when it comes to mandatory Indian law,” I said. “For example, the Act’s rules on public policy, arbitrability of disputes, and enforcement of awards always apply. But for procedure, filing, format, and timelines, these institutional rules shape the process.”

In short, the institution you choose, or the decision to go ad hoc, affects how you draft your claim and defence. If you forget this, you risk breaking the rules before the arbitration even begins.

When I finished explaining, Mr Vasu looked relieved.

“Good thing we checked the MCIA rules before starting our claim,” he smiled.

“Exactly,” I said. “Many do not. And they regret it later.”

Common mistakes to avoid in statements of claim and defence

A month into Mr Vasu’s arbitration, a junior lawyer from the vendor’s side called me, sounding anxious.

“Sir, can we amend our defence? We forgot to raise jurisdictional objections… the client insisted on rushing the reply…”

I paused. This was a classic mistake. One I have seen far too often.

Later that day, over coffee, I shared this story with Mr Vasu.

“You see,” I said, “even the best lawyers slip when drafting claims and defences. These mistakes can quietly kill a case.”

Let me share the most common ones so you do not make them.

1. Mistake number one: Dumping irrelevant facts.

Some lawyers believe that if they flood the statement of claim with every email, every WhatsApp message, every irrelevant clause from the contract, they will impress the tribunal. They will not. The tribunal wants clarity, not confusion. Stick to the facts that matter to your cause of action or defence.

2. Mistake number two: Failing to frame reliefs properly.

A statement of claim must clearly state what relief the claimant seeks, damages, specific performance, interest, and costs. Vague prayers like “such relief as the tribunal may deem fit” are not enough. If you forget to ask for something, the tribunal cannot award it. I once saw a claimant forget to ask for interest, and they lost lakhs because of that.

3. Mistake number three: Lack of proper legal foundation.

Many statements of claim tell a good story, but forget to link that story to the law. You must cite the contract clause, the statutory provision, or the legal principle that supports your claim or defence. Arbitrators are not mind-readers; they will not fill in the gaps for you.

4. Mistake number four: Ignoring the arbitration agreement’s scope.

Sometimes, claims are made about matters the arbitration clause does not cover, like criminal allegations or non-contractual disputes. The respondent then objects, the tribunal agrees, and those claims are struck off. Always check if your claim or defence falls within the scope of the arbitration clause.

5. Mistake number five: Raising jurisdictional objections too late.

As I told you earlier, under the competence-competence principle, the tribunal decides its own jurisdiction. But objections must be raised early, usually in the statement of defence. If you forget, you lose that weapon forever.

6. Mistake number six: Missing the chance to file a counterclaim.

A counterclaim is your chance to turn the tables. But some respondents forget to raise it in their defence, thinking they can do it later. Some tribunals refuse to accept late counterclaims. That is a door you do not want to find closed.

When I finished this list, Mr Vasu laughed softly.

“So drafting these documents is like walking a tightrope?”

“Exactly,” I said. “One careless step and the whole case could tilt.”

Knowing these traps will help you, and when we bring AI into this process (as I will show you in Part Two), we can make sure these mistakes are caught early.

But before that, let us see how recent court rulings have shaped what can and cannot go into a good statement of claim or defence. 

Recent trends in Arbitration practice

One rainy afternoon in court, I met an old colleague who had just returned from an arbitration hearing in Delhi. She looked tired but amused.

“You know what the tribunal told us?” she said. “They said our statement of claim was too wide… trying to bring in issues never meant for arbitration. They refused to hear those parts altogether.”

That is not surprising. In recent years, Indian courts and arbitral tribunals have become very strict about what you can and cannot put into your claim or defence.

Essentially, for anyone drafting a claim or defence in arbitration:

• Do not expand your claims beyond what the arbitration agreement covers. If the dispute is only about payment delay, do not add allegations of fraud or criminal conduct unless the clause allows it. Arbitrators cannot decide such matters.
• Raise your jurisdictional objections early. If you think the tribunal has no power to hear the dispute, or that the arbitration clause is invalid, say so in your first defence. Waiting till later will cost you that right.
• Frame your reliefs carefully. As seen in Ssangyong, if you forget to properly plead a claim, and the tribunal decides on it anyway, the award can be challenged in court, wasting years of time and effort.

I shared these lessons with Mr Vasu when we reviewed the vendor’s defence.

“They have raised jurisdiction issues here,” I pointed out. “We will need to respond properly or risk the tribunal doubting its own power to hear us.”

“So the courts really care about what goes into these pleadings?” he asked.

“Very much,” I said. “One careless paragraph, one missing relief, and you may end up losing not just the arbitration, but the court challenge later.”

These cases are not just theory. They shape how arbitrators and judges read your statements of claim and defence every day. And if you forget their lessons, your entire case could be in danger.

But do not worry. In Part Two, I will show you how AI tools can help you check for these risks before you even file your documents.

For now, let us set the stage for that by looking briefly at how technology is already touching the world of arbitration drafting. 

What is the role of technology and AI in arbitration today? 

A few weeks after the defence was filed, Mr Vasu called me again, but this time, not about his case.

“I was reading about this AI tool that can draft contracts and suggest clauses,” he said, sounding curious. “Do you think we could have used something like that for our arbitration pleadings?”

“You are not the only one asking that these days. AI is slowly walking into arbitration rooms not as a decision-maker, but as a silent helper in the background.”

And that is true. Around the world, and now in India too, technology is changing how lawyers prepare claims and defences. AI-powered tools can now:

• Scan contracts and extract key clauses relevant to the dispute.
• Analyse hundreds of past cases to suggest possible arguments.
• Check your draft for missing standard components like forgotten reliefs or jurisdiction objections.
• Even predict risks, such as whether a tribunal might find your claim outside the scope of the arbitration clause.

“But does the law allow this?” Vasu asked, sounding cautious.

“Of course,” I replied. “AI is just a tool. It helps you work faster, smarter. But the lawyer’s judgment, your mind, your caution, and your understanding of Indian law remain the most important things. AI cannot replace that.”

Already, law firms in India are quietly using such tools for arbitration for document review, legal research, drafting assistance, and risk checking. Soon, drafting a statement of claim or defence without running it through an AI checker may feel as strange as filing a brief without spell-checking it.

But, and this is important, you need to know where to trust AI, and where not to. AI may miss the human factors of strategy, tone, or commercial reality. And it must always fit within the strict requirements of Indian arbitration law, the things we discussed so far.

That is exactly what I will show you in Part Two of this guide: how to practically use AI to make your arbitration pleadings better, without losing control of your case.

For now, just know this: technology is not the future of arbitration drafting. It is already here.

Conclusion: Why getting claim and defence right matters in arbitration

When the final hearing in Mr Vasu’s arbitration began, I saw the tribunal flipping through two thick files, one holding our statement of claim, the other the vendor’s defence.

They were not looking at witness statements.
They were not studying invoices or technical reports.

They were reading the pleadings line by line.

And that reminded me, once again, why the statement of claim and defence are the soul of arbitration.

Unlike courts, where pleadings may evolve over the years, arbitration runs on these first documents. They frame the issues. They guide the evidence. They shape what the tribunal can and cannot decide.

If you get the claim or defence wrong by missing facts, misstating reliefs, or breaking procedural rules, your case is already half lost. The tribunal will struggle to help you. And if the award is flawed because of your sloppy pleading, the courts may set it aside, wasting months, maybe years, of hard work.

But here is the hopeful part.

Drafting these documents is not magic. It is a skill. It is clarity. It is understanding the law, the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the institutional rules, and the recent judgments we discussed.

And soon, in Part Two, you will see how modern AI tools can become your silent assistant. Checking gaps. Suggesting structure. Spotting risks. Make sure that your statement of claim or defence stands firm like a well-built wall.

But the foundation of the legal understanding you now have must come first.

So, as you finish this part, remember: no AI tool, no drafting software can replace a lawyer who knows how to tell their client’s story clearly, legally, and completely.

Ready to make that story sharper, faster with the help of technology?

Then let us step into Part Two.

 Frequently asked questions (FAQ)

1. Can the parties agree on their own format for the statement of claim and defence?

Yes, they can. Indian arbitration law allows parties great flexibility. As long as the agreed format does not violate the mandatory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the parties can decide how detailed or simple their pleadings should be. Institutional rules (like ICC or SIAC) may also prescribe certain formats.

2. Is the statement of defence compulsory in Indian arbitration?

Technically, the respondent can choose not to file a defence, but that is very risky. The tribunal may proceed ex parte (without hearing the respondent) and pass an award based only on the claimant’s version. Under section 25(c) of the Act, this is permitted if the respondent wilfully fails to file a defence without showing sufficient cause.

3. Can counterclaims be raised later in the arbitration process?

Counterclaims should ideally be raised along with the statement of defence under section 23(2A). If raised later, the tribunal may or may not allow them, depending on the case timeline and fairness to the other party. Some tribunals, especially under institutional rules, are strict about this.

4. What happens if a statement of claim or defence is vague or incomplete?

A vague or incomplete pleading weakens the party’s case. The tribunal may refuse to consider claims or defences that are not properly pleaded. Worse, the final award may be challenged or set aside in court for deciding matters outside the scope of the pleadings, as seen in the Ssangyong Engineering case.

5. Can new facts or claims be added after filing the statement of claim?

Yes, but only with the tribunal’s permission under section 23(3). The tribunal will consider whether the amendment causes unfair surprise or delay. Parties must explain why the new facts or claims were not included earlier.

6. Does the Indian Arbitration Act override institutional rules?

For procedural matters, parties and institutions may set their own rules. But the mandatory provisions of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, such as public policy restrictions or rules on arbitrability, cannot be overridden by agreement or institutional procedure.

7. Is there any difference between drafting pleadings for ad hoc arbitration versus institutional arbitration?

Yes. Institutional rules usually require more structured and detailed pleadings and may impose strict timelines or specific content requirements. In ad hoc arbitration, the Act and the parties’ agreement govern the process, allowing more flexibility but also demanding more care from the lawyers.

8. Will AI drafting tools replace lawyers in arbitration someday?

Unlikely. AI tools can assist in research, structure, checking for gaps, and suggesting improvements, but the legal strategy, judgment, and understanding of client interests remain human tasks. In Indian arbitration, knowing the law, the contract, and the tribunal’s expectations is still essential.