ADR IN ONLINE GAMING & E-SPORTS DISPUTES: A NEW FRONTIER FOR ODR

AUTHOR – TUSHAR RAUT, LLM STUDENT AT NAVLMAL FIRODIA LAW COLLEGE

BEST CITATION – TUSHAR RAUT, ADR IN ONLINE GAMING & E-SPORTS DISPUTES: A NEW FRONTIER FOR ODR, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 67-76, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The rapid growth of online gaming and e-sports has transformed the digital economy, evolving from casual entertainment into a global industry involving professional players, sponsors, publishers, and streaming platforms. With this expansion, disputes have become inevitable ranging from contractual disagreements between players and organizations, sponsorship conflicts, and intellectual property violations to issues of cheating, unfair trade practices, consumer protection, and cyber security breaches. The transnational nature of gaming communities makes such disputes particularly complex, as parties are often located in different jurisdictions, creating challenges of enforceability, cost, and delay when relying on traditional court systems.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) offers a promising solution to these challenges by providing faster, more confidential, and flexible mechanisms such as arbitration, mediation, and negotiation. When integrated with technology, ADR evolves into Online Dispute Resolution (ODR), which is especially suited for the gaming ecosystem. ODR allows disputes to be addressed through digital platforms, utilizing tools like video conferencing, AI-assisted processes, and block chain-based evidence management. These innovations align naturally with the online environment of gaming, making dispute resolution accessible, efficient, and adaptable to the fast-paced demands of tournaments and virtual marketplaces.

This paper explores the role of ADR and ODR as a new frontier in addressing online gaming and e-sports disputes. It examines the nature of conflicts arising in the industry, evaluates why traditional litigation often fails, and analyses how ADR mechanisms can be tailored to meet sector-specific needs. Comparative perspectives from jurisdictions such as India, the United States, the European Union, and leading Asian markets are discussed, along with institutional models and private ODR platforms. The study concludes that ADR and ODR not only provide effective remedies but also contribute to the legitimacy, fairness, and sustainable growth of the global e-sports industry.

Keywords:-

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR); Online Dispute Resolution (ODR); E-sports disputes; Online gaming industry; Arbitration and mediation; Cross-border conflicts; Intellectual property in gaming; Digital consumer protection

GST RATES AND RATIONALIZATION AND TRIBUNAL APPEALS PROCEDURE

AUTHOR – SHRIRANG KASHYAP, STUDENT AT DECCAN EDUCATION SOCIETY’S SHRI NAVALMAL FIRODIYA LAW COLLEGE

BEST CITATION – SHRIRANG KASHYAP, GST RATES AND RATIONALIZATION AND TRIBUNAL APPEALS PROCEDURE, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 64-66, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Next-Generation GST Rate Rationalisation: Inception of a Simplified Tax Regime (Effective 22 September 2025)

In a landmark recalibration of indirect taxation, the GST Council, at its fifty-sixth meeting on 3 September 2025, unveiled a sweeping overhaul—slimming the multiplicity of tax slabs into a more coherent framework that shall take legal effect on 22 September 2025

“DEATH-CUM-RETIREMENT GRATUITY FOR TEACHERS: SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES APPLICABILITY OF MAHARASHTRA PENSION RULES”

AUTHOR – DR. VANDITA CHAHAR, ASSISTANT PROFESSOR OF LAW, JAIPUR NATIONAL UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – DR. VANDITA CHAHAR, “DEATH-CUM-RETIREMENT GRATUITY FOR TEACHERS: SUPREME COURT CLARIFIES APPLICABILITY OF MAHARASHTRA PENSION RULES”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 57-63, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Case Title: Vikram Bhalchandra Ghongade vs. The Headmistress Girls High School and Junior College & Ors.

Citation: 2025 INSC 824
Special Leave Petition (C) No.: 19436 of 2024
Court: Supreme Court of India
Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia & Hon’ble Mr. Justice K. Vinod Chandran
Date of Judgment: 14th July 2025

Introduction

Gratuity, as a form of terminal benefit, occupies a central place in India’s social-welfare jurisprudence. It represents not merely deferred wages but also a recognition of an employee’s long-standing contribution to an institution. The statutory foundation of this right is primarily found in the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 (PGA), a central legislation intended to secure minimum uniform benefits across industries and establishments. Yet, the multiplicity of employment regimes in India, especially in the education sector, has led to significant interpretive conflicts between central legislation and state-specific service rules.

LIVE-IN-RELATIONSHIP IS AN EXAMPLE OF PREVALENCE OF MORALITY OVER LAW

AUTHOR – KOMAL MOHITE, STUDENT AT DES SHRI NAVALMAL FIRODIA LAW COLLEGE, PUNE

BEST CITATION – KOMAL MOHITE, LIVE-IN-RELATIONSHIP IS AN EXAMPLE OF PREVALENCE OF MORALITY OVER LAW, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 48-56, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

New version of marriage is known as live-in-relationship. The concept of marriage is updated to live-in-relationship for couples to live together without any legal bond.  The concept of live-in-relationship has been recognized since Vedic period for Indians, known as Gandharva Vivah, where a couple lives together without societal acceptance and without any marriage rituals like in case of Shakuntala and King Dushyanta. The young generation nowadays are more attracted to live-in-relationships as there is no legal responsibility, and allows them to enjoy life similar to marriage. Live-in-relationship now is been leagalised in India. Cohabitation of two adults who live together for temporary period or permanently same as marriage, as there are no rituals cause of which no need of divorce. There is no legal bond between the couple and there is no compulsion to be responsible in the relationship. There are no official registering and documentation, whom to give custody of minor born from live-in-relationship; in case of LGBT couple; will the minor be legal heir after the death of individual . It will affect the personal life of individual if he or she ends the live-in-relationship and future of the child born in live-in-relationship as society has not yet accepted the concept of live-in-relationships. It might seem like there is easy and free companionship but there are legal obligations, responsibilities and loyalty is involved. As the laws for live-in-relationship will put some legal limitations on the couple and the couple will get recognition for their relationship by law.  As live-in-relationship is legally recognized still there are no specific amendments in support of live-in-relationship. There should be laws for the individuals who are in live-in-relationship and for those who have ended their relation. Rights for minors born from these live-in-relationship should be enacted .The researcher has undertaken the topic to understand and study the meaning of live-in-relationship and also to find out the consequences for the couple, their child as well as for the society. Morality varies from individual to individual whereas law is equal for all but if someone is having wrong morals then it affect his social life which will definitely have impact on personal life. That’s why morals of every person should be in limits of humanity which should not harm anyone including himself. Although it may be legalized, there are no laws in support of live-in-relationships in India. Perhaps morals, values and ethics are the main reasons behind lack of legal amendments in support of live-in-relationships.

KEY WORDS :- LIVE-IN-RELATIONSHIPS, COUPLES , MINOR CHILD, SOCIETY

“VIRTUAL COURTS INFRASTRUCTURE UNDER BNSS: ACCESS TO JUSTICE VS DIGITAL EXCLUSION.”

AUTHOR – TILAK VIPUL MISTRY, STUDENT AT SHREE L.R. TIWARI COLLEGE OF LAW, MUMBAI UNIVERSITY

BEST CITATION – TILAK VIPUL MISTRY, “VIRTUAL COURTS INFRASTRUCTURE UNDER BNSS: ACCESS TO JUSTICE VS DIGITAL EXCLUSION.”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 40-47, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract:

^[1]The introduction of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) signifies a transformative moment in India’s criminal procedural law, superseding the previous Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, and ushering in a wave of tangible reforms for streamlining justice delivery. One of the most important innovations under BNSS is the virtual courts, which have been formally acknowledged and integrated in the system, allowing electronic filing of First Information Reports (e-FIRs) and issuance of e-summons and the use of secure video conferencing platforms for trials and hearings. The reforms are meant to increase access to justice, decrease judicial delays, and increase efficiency within India’s over-stuffed courtrooms.

This research paper conducts an analysis on the dual impact of virtual courts under BNSS, where it points to the democratizing potential of access to justice through them while underscoring the digital exclusion that risks. While virtual courts make it easier for litigants who live in remote areas to participate in courts, save on travelling costs, and ensure early adjudication, there is also a concern over the digital divide, lack of technological literacy and poor infrastructure, especially in marginalized sections.

The study adopts the doctrinal research methodology which is based on the careful examination of the BNSS, 2023, relevant case laws, government reports and secondary literature. A comparative approach is also adopted, comparing virtual court processes under BNSS with traditional trial processes under CrPC, 1973, and also with digital justice frameworks of other jurisdictions. Further, empirical examples are provided from pilot virtual court projects and High Court initiatives to evaluate on-the-ground challenges and successes.

Drawing on the arguments of substance and structure, this paper also looks at the advantages and shortcomings of virtual courts in light of the trade-off between innovation in technology and equitable access to justice. Recommendations are made on how digital exclusion could be addressed through public access centres, digital literacy initiatives, and hybrid models of court operating both online and in person.

Keywords: BNSS 2023, Virtual Courts, Access to Justice, Digital Exclusion, E-FIR, E-Summons, Digital Evidence, Doctrinal Research, Comparative Study, Procedural Law, Judicial Reforms

---

[1]               Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, §§ 12–18 (India). Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, §§ 190–204 (India). Law Commission of India, 245th Report: Digitalization of Courts and Legal Processes, 2014.

“THE ROLE OF LAW AND POLICY IN SAFEGUARDING INDIA’S WILDLIFE: AN ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVE”

AUTHOR- JANANI R, STUDENT AT THE TAMIL NADU DR. AMBEDKAR LAW UNIVERSITY (TNDALU)

BEST CITATION – JANANI R, “THE ROLE OF LAW AND POLICY IN SAFEGUARDING INDIA’S WILDLIFE: AN ANALYTICAL PERSPECTIVE”, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 25-38, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

ABSTRACT

Wildlife resources play a fundamental role in human existence and progress, making their conservation a matter of great importance. However, in the modern era, ecosystems and biodiversity are facing extreme threats, leading to a growing number of flora and fauna species becoming endangered. Wildlife resources include all naturally thriving species—both terrestrial and aquatic—that exist without human interference. Preserving these species in their natural wilderness is essential for maintaining ecological balance. Unfortunately, human activities, including poaching, logging, habitat destruction, wildfires, disease outbreaks, urban expansion, and negative human-wildlife interactions, have critically endangered many wildlife species. In response, researchers, governments, conservationists, and local communities have initiated various wildlife conservation efforts to mitigate these threats. Among the most effective measures is wildlife law enforcement, which aims to protect biodiversity in protected areas and wildlife habitats. This paper critically explores how legal and policy frameworks contribute to the protection and conservation of wildlife in India.KEYWORDS: Wildlife, poaching, Human-wildlife conflict, conservation efforts, law enforcement, policy frameworks.

RIVERS BEYOND BORDERS: AN INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE ON SOUTH ASIA’S WATER DISPUTES OF INDUS, GANGES-BRAHMAPUTRA-MEGHNA (GBM) BASIN

AUTHOR – DNYANESHWARI JADHAV, LLM STUDENT AT MODERN LAW COLLEGE

BEST CITATION – DNYANESHWARI JADHAV, RIVERS BEYOND BORDERS: AN INTERNATIONAL LAW PERSPECTIVE ON SOUTH ASIA’S WATER DISPUTES OF INDUS, GANGES-BRAHMAPUTRA-MEGHNA (GBM) BASIN, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 11-24, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

This study starts by tracing the development of international water law and by outlining its ey current concepts and principles. Against that background, the authors  focus on the hydro-politics of four countries of the South Asian Sub-continent:  Bangladesh, India, Nepal, and Pakistan. They analyze the problems these countries  have encountered as riparians of international rivers and how they have addressed them. In particular, the study reviews the treaty regimes governing the Indus River  basin, the Ganges River basin, and the Kosi, Gandaki, and Mahakali river basins. Each of these regimes is described in depth, but special attention is devoted to the main problems each of the treaties sought to address: dispute resolution in the context of the Indus, water-sharing with respect to the Ganges, and an integrated approach to water resources management for India and Nepal with respect to the Kosi, Gandaki, and Mahakali rivers. In the final part, the authors review treaty experience and offer observations on bilateralism and multilateralism, third-party intervention, water rights and benefits, institutional arrangements, and dispute resoSolution. They conclude by stressing the importance of cooperation throughout the treaty-making process. ^[1]

South Asia’s transboundary river systems—most notably the Indus and Ganges-Brahmaputra-Meghna (GBM) basins—serve as vital resources for over a billion people. Yet, they continue to be sources of ongoing geopolitical tension and ecological vulnerability. This article explores the legal aspects of cross-border water sharing, examining how international law frameworks such as the UN Watercourses Convention, the Helsinki and Berlin Rules, and principles of equitable and reasonable use relate to the region’s complex hydropolitics^[1]. By comparing the Indus Waters Treaty and the Ganges Water Sharing Treaty, the article assesses the strengths and weaknesses of bilateral approaches in addressing modern issues like climate change, upstream hydropower development, and decreasing water quality. It advocates for a shift toward basin-wide, cooperative legal regimes that incorpora te ecological sustainability, human rights, and regional diplomacy. Combining doctrinal analysis with policy critique, the article advances the discussion on transboundary water governance and suggests legal pathways for conflict resolution and fair resource management in South Asia.^[2]

Water has emerged as a pivotal issue in global geopolitics, particularly in regions where rivers traverse national boundaries. The transboundary nature of freshwater systems inherently involves multiple states, making their governance a matter of international concern. With the global population expanding rapidly—coupled with intensified industrial activity, urban sprawl, and diminishing freshwater availability—both surface and groundwater resources are under unprecedented strain.

South Asia, home to nearly one-fourth of the world’s population, exemplifies this crisis. The region is marked not only by demographic density but also by some of the most persistent and complex interstate tensions over shared water resources. The legacy of partition between India and Pakistan laid the foundation for enduring disputes over river systems, particularly the Indus basin. Beyond this bilateral conflict, India’s water relations with Bangladesh, Nepal, and Bhutan have also been fraught with contention, often revolving around issues of upstream control, seasonal variability, and lack of institutional coordination.^[1]

This study investigates the underlying causes of these transboundary water disputes, the severity of water scarcity across the region, and the broader implications for diplomatic and regional stability. It argues that effective water governance—anchored in transparent institutions, equitable legal frameworks, and cooperative mechanisms—is essential for sustainable management. Such governance must not only address internal water distribution but also facilitate cross-border collaboration rooted in mutual benefit and ecological stewardship.^[3]

Keywords:  Water governance, scarcity, hydro politics, security, conflict

---

[1]  Kishor Uprety & Salman M. A. Salman, Legal Aspects of Sharing and Management of Transboundary Waters in South Asia: Preventing Conflicts and Promoting Cooperation, 56 Hydrological Sciences Journal 641 (2011), http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/02626667.2011.576252.

[2] Uprety and Salman, supra note 1.

[3] 09_chapter 1.Pdf, https://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/16725/9/09_chapter%201.pdf (last visited Sept. 4, 2025).

ADR IN LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP DISPUTES: NEED FOR LEGAL RECOGNITION

AUTHOR – ASHALESHA POKHARNIKAR, LLM STUDENT AT NAVLMAL FIRODIA LAW COLLEGE

BEST CITATION – ASHALESHA POKHARNIKAR, ADR IN LIVE-IN RELATIONSHIP DISPUTES: NEED FOR LEGAL RECOGNITION, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 01-10, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344.

Abstract

The emergence of live-in relationships in India represents a significant shift in social and legal dynamics. Traditionally, family law has been anchored in the institution of marriage, leaving non-marital cohabitation outside its formal framework. However, with changing societal attitudes, courts have cautiously extended limited recognition to live-in partnerships, especially in matters concerning domestic violence, maintenance, and child custody. Despite these developments, the absence of comprehensive legislation has created ambiguity and inconsistency in adjudication.

Disputes arising from live-in relationships often involve highly personal matters such as financial support, property sharing, domestic abuse, or child welfare. Resorting to litigation not only prolongs emotional distress but also exposes partners to public scrutiny, reinforcing stigma. Moreover, adversarial court processes may not always serve the interests of reconciliation, confidentiality, and long-term well-being of the parties involved. This makes conventional litigation an inadequate tool for handling such delicate issues.

Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms particularly mediation and conciliation offer a constructive pathway for resolving conflicts in live-in relationships. ADR ensures confidentiality, reduces social stigma, and provides quicker, cost-effective, and less adversarial solutions tailored to the needs of the parties. This article argues for the urgent need to accord legal recognition to ADR in live-in relationship disputes, thereby harmonizing personal liberty with social justice and aligning family law with contemporary realities.

Keywords:

 Live-in Relationships, Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR), Mediation, Conciliation, Family Law, Domestic Violence Act, Right to Life and Personal Liberty, Legal Recognition, Social Justice, Confidential Dispute Resolution

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CrPC 1973 AND THE BNSS 2023 FOR MODERNIZING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN INDIA

AUTHOR – ANSARI SOBIYA PARVEEN, STUDENT AT SLRTCL (MUMBAI UNIVERSITY)

BEST CITATION – ANSARI SOBIYA PARVEEN, A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF THE CrPC 1973 AND THE BNSS 2023 FOR MODERNIZING CRIMINAL PROCEDURE IN INDIA, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 841-846, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT

India’s criminal justice system saw major procedural changes when the 1973 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) was replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).  Faster investigation and trial, increased victim protection, and increased use of technology are the goals of the new law.  Important clauses include E-FIR (Section 173), stricter deadlines for charge sheet filing and judgment rendering (Sections 193, 258, 262), provisions for extended custody (Section 187), the acceptance of digital evidence (Sections 176, 356, 530), and the use of community service as a form of punishment (Section 23). For offenses against women and children, a distinct chapter has been included (Sections 280–303), which calls for expedited trials and considerate treatment of victims.  This study compares the BNSS and the CrPC, emphasizing their advantages, disadvantages, and potential implementation issues.  It offers recommendations for guaranteeing an equitable and efficient justice system while also looking more closely at the reforms’ constitutional and judicial background.

KEYWORDS

BNSS, CrPC, Criminal Procedure, Speedy Trial, Victim Rights, E-FIR, Digital Evidence, Custody, Community Service, Criminal Justice Reform.

CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY OF GOVERNMENT IN INDIAN LAW

AUTHOR – ADV. MAHESH MILIND RAMPURKAR, LLM 2ND YEAR, SHRI. NAVALMAL FIRODIA LAW COLLEGE PUNE

BEST CITATION – ADV. MAHESH MILIND RAMPURKAR, CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY OF GOVERNMENT IN INDIAN LAW, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 5 (11) OF 2025, PG. 833-840, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344

ABSTRACT

                    IN THE CAPITALIST GLOBALISED WORLD OF TODAY, GOVERNMENTS KEEP THEIR PROMISES JUST LIKE ANYONE ELSE. IN THE TIMES WHEN BRITISHERS RULED INDIA, CONTRACTS INVOLVING THE GOVERNMENT WERE GOVERNED BY ENGLISH COMMON LAW, WHICH OFTEN PROVIDED SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY. AFTER INDEPENDENCE, THE INDIAN CONTRACT ACT, 1872, BECAME THE KEY LAW GOVERNING CONTRACTS, INCLUDING THE ONES INVOLVING GOVERNMENT AS A PARTY. ARTICLE 299 OF THE INDIAN CONSTITUTION LAYS DOWN CONDITIONS FOR VALID GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS. NOW, CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY OF THE GOVERNMENT HAS EVOLVED OVER TIME, TODAY ACCOUNTABILITY IS ENSURED IN PUBLIC PROCUREMENT AND SERVICE AGREEMENTS. COURTS HAVE PLAYED SIGNIFICANT ROLE IN BALANCING GOVERNMENTS FUNCTIONS WITH THE RIGHTS OF CITIZENS. GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS ARE LEGALLY BINDING AGREEMENTS BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT(STATE) AS ONE PARTY AND PRIVATE PARTIES. THESE CONTRACTS MUST ADHERE TO CERTAIN FORMAL REQUIREMENTS AND THEY MUST UPHOLD FAIRNESS, TRANSPARENCY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY. ISSUES LIKE LACK OF TRANSPARENCY, ARBITRARY DECISIONS, AND NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE LEGAL PROCEDURES HAVE VERY OFTEN LED TO DISPUTES. THE CHALLENGE IS IN PROVING THAT PUBLIC FUND IS SPENT EFFICIENTLY AND LAWFULLY. STRENGTHENING LEGAL SAFEGUARDS AND TRANSPARENCY IN PROCEDURE IN GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS WILL LEAD TO REDUCED DISPUTES AND FOSTER GREATER ACCOUNTABILITY. THE REFORMS NEED TO INCLUDE MANDATORY DIGITAL RECORDS FOR CONTRACT MANAGEMENT, STRONGER MONITORING OF PROCUREMENT PROCESSES, AND CLEAR DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMS. THIS ARTICLE EXPLORES THE GOVERNMENT CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY UNDER INDIAN LAW, ANALYSES KEY CHALLENGES, AND PROPOSES REFORMS FOR IMPROVING TRANSPARENCY AND EFFICIENCY IN PUBLIC CONTRACTS

KEY WORDS: GOVERNMENT CONTRACTS, PUBLIC PROCUREMENT, CONTRACTUAL LIABILITY, ARTICLE 299, TRANSPARENCY, DISPUTE RESOLUTION