Arbitration has gone on to become a favourite dispute resolution mechanism that is fast, confidential, and flexible in contrast to the traditional litigation. nevertheless, it is its contractual structure that tends to restrain tribunals to the explicit content of agreements, and does not allow much consideration with regard to fairness. This essay focuses on the increasing trend towards equitable forms of relief (including injunctions, specific performance, rectification and rescission) in arbitration, specifically in the context of international commercial dispute. It relies on the references made to Indian and international practice to emphasise that equity can fall between the inflexible legalities and justice in more complicated dealings. The analysis includes statutory provisions in the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, case law interception of decisions as in the case of Sundaram Finance Ltd. v. NEPC India ltd., and comparative approaches of jurisdiction as in UK, US and Singapore. It also takes into consultation the issue of enforceability, jurisdictional gaps and lack of standardized precedents. After all, the paper concludes that fair remedies ceased being a sideshow; they are gradually becoming legitimate in arbitral practice. They make sure that arbitration is not only a tool of fast resolving a dispute but also it can produce the results that are based on the conscience, fairness, and substance of justice.