Investment treaties are often understood as the paramount protections for the foreign investors across jurisdictions. An investment treaty can be understood as an international regulatory mechanism between two or more sovereign states to promote, govern and protect investments. In the context of the recent Indian Bilateral Investment Treaties (BITs), this Paper shall primarily study the shifts in the international investment regime of India and shall focus on the dispute resolution mechanism vis-a-vis India's internal regulatory obligations. Two conflicting themes shall be discussed in detail. Firstly, how the Model BIT attempts to create an investor-friendly regime. Secondly, how the Model BIT attempts to ensure that the effectiveness of internal regulations of the host-state (India) are not compromised and do not lead to violation of any treaty obligations. This Paper shows that India in an attempt to learn from its own failures in investor treaty arbitrations has shifted to a stronger regulatory framework in its Model BITs and has attempted to narrow down definitions of various terms as well as minimize ambiguity over certain provisions in its older Model BITs. India's new BIT regime seems to indicate that there would be a long-term rise in the investor-confidence