Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. vs Malkit S. Singh and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd. vs Malkit S. Singh and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Leave to withdraw Execution Application No. 2043 of 2022 with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings; the Arbitral Award declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; Interim Applications, if any, disposed of; period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation for fresh arbitration proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether the applicant should be granted leave to withdraw the execution application, which arises out of an Arbitral Award where the Arbitrator's appointment was unilateral, with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings. +2 more

Court's answer

Leave and liberty as prayed for is granted: the applicant may 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 to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Key takeaways

The Execution Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.ratio¶33
In sequel to the withdrawal, the Interim Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.ratio¶34
It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Execution Application (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction; Rajesh S. Patil, J.; 26th March, 2026) arising out of an Arbitral Award in which the Arbitrator's appointment was unilateral: the applicant sought leave to withdraw the execution application with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings. The Court, adverting to the view taken by it in L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022) and to the Supreme Court's judgment in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. 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 being void-ab-initio on the ground that the arbitrator's appointment was unilateral, granted leave and liberty as prayed, declared the Arbitral Award non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, disposed of the Execution Application as withdrawn along with pending Interim Applications, permitted the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, and excluded the period from invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order for the purpose of limitation for fresh arbitration proceedings.

Vivekanand

1/2

3-EXA-2043-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2043 OF 2022 WITH NOTICE NO. 591 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2043 OF 2022

Shriram Transport Finance Co. Ltd

….. Applicant

Versus

Malkit S. Singh And Anr.

….. Respondents

Mr. Avanish Bangera h/f Disha Karambar & Associates, Advocate for the Applicant.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 26^th MARCH, 2026

P.C. :-

Mr. Bangera, 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, he on

instructions of his 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)

No. 5277 of 2022, considering the latest judgment of the Supreme

Court decided on 5 January, 2026, in the matter of Bhadra

Vivekanand

2/2

3-EXA-2043-2022.doc

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.

1. In sequel, the Interim Applications, if any, also stand

disposed of.

1. 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.)