Bombay High Court
Shriram Finance Limited (Formely Known ... vs Venkatesh Husenappa Begar on 28 April, 2026
Author: Abhay Ahuja
Bench: Abhay Ahuja
2026:BHC-OS:10944
901 TO 910, 912 , 1024 TO 1004, 1008 TO 1022, 1024 TO 1144 AND 1151 TO 1158.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 910, 912 TO 1022, 1024 TO 1144, 1008 TO
1022, 1024 TO 1144 AND 1151 TO 1158
Mr. Pratik Barot with Ms. Angel Pandy i/b Kruti Bhavsar for the
Respondent in Sr.No. 917.
Ms. Rahila Memon with Ms. Reet Jain i/b S. I. Joshi & Co. for the
Applicant in Sr. No. 918.
Mr. Padmakar S. Garad i/b SG Legal & Associates for the Applicant in
Sr. Nos. 951, 958, 991, 992, 994, 1054, 1055, 1112, 1114 to 1118 and
1152 to 1154.
Ms. Vedika Pedhambkar i/b Akhil Modi & Associates for the Applicant
in Sr. Nos. 1157 and 1158.
Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O. M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Sr.
No. 911, 916, 917,944,945,978,1022,1023,1024,1029,1030 & 1060.
Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Sr. No. 1028.
Mr. Vaibhav V. Ugle with Mr. Shubham Pasvant for the Applicant in Sr.
No. 1041 to 1044.
Ms. Asha Bose i/b Ms. Swatantri Waghmare for the Applicant in Sr. No.
1110.
None present in other matters.
CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE : 28th April 2026
PC:-
1. All these matters have been listed in view of the decision of the Digitally Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhadra International (India) Pvt. signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date:
2026.04.28 Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India 1 where the Hon'ble 19:19:34 +0530 Supreme Court has observed that unilateral appointment of arbitrator 1 2026 SCC Online SC 7 Nikita Gadgil 1/2 ::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2026 08:04:03 ::: 901 TO 910, 912 , 1024 TO 1004, 1008 TO 1022, 1024 TO 1144 AND 1151 TO 1158.doc is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution.
2. Since in all these matters it has been found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral, in view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside and the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications, and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, accordingly stand dismissed / disposed.
3. It would be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.
4. As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.
5. Liberty to apply in the event there exists an express agreement in writing in terms of proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the "said Act") waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the said Act.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) Nikita Gadgil 2/2 ::: Uploaded on - 28/04/2026 ::: Downloaded on - 29/04/2026 08:04:03 :::