The choice of ideal local anaesthetic agent for spinal anaesthesia is therefore crucial in the ambulatory setting. Lignocaine is associated with a high incidence of transient neurological symptoms, and bupivacaine produces sensory and motor blocks for a prolonged duration. Aims: This study was designed to compare preservative-free 2-chloroprocaine 40 mg with hyperbaric bupivacaine 15 mg for spinal anaesthesia in an elective ambulatory setting. Methodology: After approval from the institutional ethics committee, this prospective double-blind interventional study was conducted in 64 patients undergoing spinal anaesthesia. Informed consent was obtained and the study sample was divided into two groups. Group A-1%2-chloroprocaine(n=32), Group B-0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine(n=32).For statistical analysis, unpaired T-test and chi-square test were used. Results: The onset characteristics of the sensory block were similar between the groups. However, the onset of motor block, regression characteristics did show a different profile between the two groups. The time for complete regression of sensory blockade to S2 in the 2-CP group was less that of the bupivacaine group (147 min vs 252 min, respectively, p value__ampersandsignlt;0.0001), a difference of 95 minutes. Similarly, the duration of the motor __ampersandsignamp; sensory block was significantly shorter in the chloroprocaine group. The time for ambulation was 184 minutes in chloroprocaine group compared to 280 minutes in the bupivacaine group(p value__ampersandsignlt;0.0001). Conclusions: 40 mg of plain 1% 2-chloroprocaine proved to be comparable with 15 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in terms of onset of sensory block. But showed faster recovery from anaesthesia implying superior suitability for outpatient surgeries.