​The enactment of the principal arbitration legislation in India, the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996, notably coincided with the enactment of the United Kingdom’s Arbitration Act, 1996. While both turned 25 years old in 2021, the two jurisdictions have seen distinct paths in the development and evolution of their respective arbitration landscapes. London, traditionally, has always been a significant seat of arbitration for parties around the world due to its consistent pro-arbitration outlook. India, on the other hand, had a questionable decade following the enactment of the Indian Arbitration Act, but is now gradually moving towards establishing itself as a preferable seat of arbitration. As India emerges as an economic power, it has taken significant strides to ensure a predictable, transparent, and reliable framework for the enforcement of contracts. In doing so, the legislative and judicial outlook in the country has been focused on building a strong arbitration culture, which emphasises giving effect to arbitration agreements and awards. There are several overlaps in the arbitration laws and practices of both India and the United Kingdom. This article discusses the comparative approach of Indian and English arbitration laws and practices. In doing so, it analyses the similarities and overlaps between the approach of courts in the two jurisdictions, particularly with respect to arbitral autonomy and the enforcement of arbitration agreements as well as foreign arbitral awards.