Even during the wake of the e-commerce era where the number of online transactions are skyrocketing on a daily basis, the Indian justice system has not given up its overprotectionist stance of prohibiting arbitration of consumer disputes. Such a paternalistic approach towards consumer dispute arbitration, which was evident in the recent case of Aftab Singh v. Emaar MGF Land Ltd., can lead to India being branded as an unfavourable jurisdiction for businesses. This article is an attempt to demystify the ambivalent positions held by the courts in India in the arbitration of consumer disputes. In order to do so, the paper firstly seeks to decipher the arbitrability doctrine in the Indian courts. Secondly, a brief analysis of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (“COPRA”) will be carried out to inquire whether the Act has achieved its goals and if arbitration of consumer disputes is essential. Thirdly, an analysis of the interaction between Indian courts and arbitrability of consumer disputes will be carried out. Fourthly, the major concerns relating to arbitration in India will be highlighted. Fifthly and finally, an overview of the foreign trends/positions on consumer arbitration will be carried out to serve as recommendations for arbitration of consumer disputes in India.