Axis Bank (Formerly Known as Uti Bank Ltd.) vs Pooja Yogesh Varma — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Axis Bank (Formerly Known as Uti Bank Ltd.) vs Pooja Yogesh Varma — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Leave to withdraw Execution Application No. 1931/2022 with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings; Arbitral Award declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; Interim Applications/Notice disposed of; period from invocation of arbitration till 21 April 2026 excluded for limitation.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant should be granted leave to withdraw the execution application, with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings. +2 more

Court's answer

Leave and liberty granted to the applicant to withdraw the execution application, with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings.

Ratio / Principle

The Arbitral Award which is the subject matter of the present proceedings is declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Key takeaways

The Execution Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.ratio¶¶31
In sequel, the Interim Applications/Notice, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶¶32
It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶¶34

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Rajesh S. Patil, J., 21 April 2026): Execution Application No. 1931/2022 (alongwith Interim Application No. 2668/2021 and Notice No. 224/2025) — Axis Bank (formerly UTI Bank Ltd.) v. Pooja Yogesh Varma. The execution proceedings arose out of an Arbitral Award in which the Arbitrator's appointment was unilateral. Counsel for the applicant sought leave to withdraw with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration. Adverting to his earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022) and the Supreme Court's judgment of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026) — that even at the stage of execution an arbitral award can be set aside as void-ab-initio where the arbitrator's appointment was unilateral — the Court granted leave and liberty, declared the Arbitral Award non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, disposed of the Execution Application as withdrawn alongwith the Interim Applications/Notice, left the parties free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, and directed that the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order stand excluded for limitation purposes.

KVM

1/2

13 - EXA 1931 OF 2022.doc

Digitally signed by KANCHAN KANCHAN VINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date: 2026.04.21 18:36:07 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1931/2022

ALONGWITH

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2668/2021

ALONGWITH NOTICE NO. 224/2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1931/2022

AXIS BANK (FORMERLY KNOWN AS UTI BANK LTD.) VS

POOJA YOGESH VARMA

….. APPLICANT

….. RESPONDENT

Adv. Bijal Gogri i/b. O M Gujar Law Chambers the Applicant.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 21 APRIL, 2026

P.C. :-

Ms. Gogri, learned counsel appearing for the claimant

submits that the execution proceedings arise out of an Arbitral Award, where the Arbitrator’s appointment was unilateral. Hence, she on instructions of her client seeks leave to withdraw the present execution application, with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings.

I have taken a view in the judgment of L & T Finance Ltd.

vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. in Commercial Execution Application (L)

2/2

KVM

13 - EXA 1931 OF 2022.doc

No. 5277 of 2022, considering the latest judgment of the Supreme Court decided on 5 January, 2026, in the matter of Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. Airport Authority of

India, Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026, wherein it has been held that even at the stage of execution, an arbitral award can be set aside being void-ab-initio on the grounds that the appointment of the arbitrator was unilateral.

1. Leave and liberty as prayed for, is granted.

3.1) The Arbitral Award which is subject matter of the present proceedings is hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

1. Execution Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.

In sequel, the Interim Applications/Notice, if any, also

stand disposed of.

It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.

As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today shall stand excluded for the purpose of initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)