Social movements, starkingly in the third worls, represent a dichotomous view of the law, either as a force to raise the voice of the weaker section or as a monopolistic tool in hands of few powerful, for instance, the administrators, legislators, against the common masses. At the same time the same law allows resistance to breathe, especially in a globalized world laws prolifers different levels and thus the counter hegemonic resistance does not boundary itself to national elites, but also covers  global MNCs  within its ambit, especially in cases of developments involving huge funds. These social movements also draw their strength from rising sensitization of international norms in areas of human rights, environment, indegenous people’s rights. But, irrespective of the existence of these factors, the outcome of the social movement gets affected by a myraid of influences and the role played by various stakeholders. This research  is a modest attempt to understand the interplay of these factors in the particular instance of Narmada Bachao Andolan .It does not and cannot conclusively establish the path followed by social movement but just highlights an instance of the nuances involved in making counter hegemonic globalization a reality.

 Download Full Paper