Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. vs Manoharlal Pratapsingh Thakur and Another — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shriram Transport Finance Company Ltd. vs Manoharlal Pratapsingh Thakur and Another — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Arbitral award declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; Execution Application dismissed; Interim Applications/Notice, if any, disposed of; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation.

Issue for consideration

Whether an arbitral award passed by a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can be declared void-ab-initio and non-executable at the stage of execution.

Court's answer

Following its earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr., which considered the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India, the Court declared the arbitral award in the present proceeding, passed by the unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator, to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Application stands dismissed.

Key takeaways

It shall be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶31
For the purpose of initiating fresh arbitration proceedings, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order shall stand excluded for limitation.ratio¶32

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Rajesh S. Patil, J.), 22 April 2026 — Execution Application No. 841/2022 alongwith Notice No. 378/2025 (M/s. Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited v. Manoharlal Pratapsingh Thakur & Anr.). None appeared for either side when the matter was called out. Noting from the proceedings that the sole arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally, and following the Judge's earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022), which considered the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026, decided 5 January 2026) that even at the stage of execution an arbitral award can be set aside as void-ab-initio on the ground of unilateral appointment of the arbitrator, the Court declared the arbitral award passed by the sole arbitrator to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, and dismissed the Execution Application. The Interim Applications/Notice, if any, stood disposed of. The parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, with the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order excluded for the purpose of limitation.

KVM

1/2

12 - EXA 841 OF 2022.doc

Digitally signed by KANCHAN KANCHANVINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date:2026.04.24 19:49:04 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 841/2022 ALONGWITH NOTICE NO. 378/2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 841/2022

M/S. SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED

….. APPLICANT

VS

MANOHARLAL PRATAPSINGH THAKUR & ANR. ….. RESPONDENTS

None for the Applicant.

None for the Respondents.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 22 APRIL, 2026

P.C. :-

1. 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.

1. 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

KVM

2/2

12 - EXA 841 OF 2022.doc

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

Execution Application stands dismissed .

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.)