SBI Carda and Payments Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Sonal Dhakana — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

SBI Carda and Payments Services Pvt. Ltd. vs Sonal Dhakana — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Execution Applications dismissed; Notices and Interim Applications disposed of; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, with the period from invocation of the arbitration till date excluded for limitation purposes.

Issue for consideration

Whether the arbitral awards passed by the unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator are valid and executable, or are void-ab-initio even at the stage of execution. +1 more

Court's answer

The arbitral awards passed in the present proceedings by the sole arbitrator are declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Applications stand dismissed.

Key takeaways

It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶29
The period from the invocation of the arbitration till today shall stand excluded for the purpose of initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶32
The Notices and the Interim Applications, if any, also stand disposed of in sequel.ratio

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay (OOCJ), Rajesh S. Patil, J., 13 February 2026 — Notices 21 N/364/2025, 22 N/365/2025 and 23 N/368/2025 of 2025 (filed under Order XXI, Rule 22 CPC) arising from Execution Applications EXA/555/2022, EXA/557/2022 and EXA/553/2022 filed by SBI Cards and Payments Services Pvt. Ltd. against Sonal Dhakana, K. S. Singh and Anthony Joshua. Relying on the Supreme Court decision of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal Nos. 37-38 of 2026) and the learned Judge's own earlier ruling in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022), the court held that arbitral awards passed by a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator are void-ab-initio even at the stage of execution, declared the awards in these proceedings non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, dismissed the Execution Applications and disposed of the Notices and Interim Applications. Fresh arbitration proceedings were permitted, with the period from invocation of the arbitration till date excluded for limitation purposes.

2026:BHC-OS:4372

Diksha Rane 21 TO 23 N 364 2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

21 N/364/2025 In

EXA/555/2022

SBI CARDA AND PAYMENTS SERVICES PVT. LTD VS SONAL DHAKANA

WITH

22 N/365/2025 In EXA/557/2022

SBI CARDS AND PAYMENTS SERVICES PVT LTD VS

K. S. SINGH

WITH 23 N/368/2025 In

EXA/553/2022 SBI CARDS AND PAYMENTS SERVICES PVT. LTD VS ANTHONY JOSHUA

None present.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J. DATE : 13 FEBRUARY 2026.

P.C. :

These Notices are filed under the provisions of Order

XXI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, in the year 2025.

1

Diksha Rane 21 TO 23 N 364 2025.doc

None appears for the Applicant, when the matter is

called out.

From the proceedings, it can be gathered that the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral.

I have taken a view in the judgment of L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. in Commercial Execution Application (L) 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.

In view of the aforesaid judgment, the arbitral awards in

the present proceedings passed by the sole arbitrator are hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

1. Execution Applications stand dismissed.

In sequel, the Notices and the Interim Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

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

2

Diksha Rane 21 TO 23 N 364 2025.doc

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.)

3

Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 16/02/2026 21:05:24