Sundaram Finance Ltd. vs Poonam Jitendra Tiwari and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sundaram Finance Ltd. vs Poonam Jitendra Tiwari and Anr. — 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; Notice and Interim Applications, if any, disposed of; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration with limitation exclusion from invocation till the date of the order

Issue for consideration

Whether the arbitral award passed by the unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can be set aside as void-ab-initio and treated as non-est/non-executable at the stage of execution +1 more

Court's answer

Since the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral, the arbitral award in the present proceeding is declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, following the view taken in L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. and the Supreme Court judgment in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Airport Authority of India

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Application stands dismissed

Key takeaways

It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with lawratio¶32
For initiating fresh arbitration proceedings, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today shall stand excluded for limitation purposesratio¶33

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Rajesh S. Patil, J., 16 February 2026), Notice No. 606 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 1592/2022 — Sundaram Finance Ltd. (applicant) v. Poonam Jitendra Tiwari and Anr. (respondents). None appeared for the applicant when the matter was called out. The Notice, filed in 2025 under Order XXI, Rule 22 of the Code of Civil Procedure, was considered on the material on record, from which it was gathered that the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral. The court recalled its own view in L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022), formed considering the Supreme Court judgment decided on 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026), holding 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. On that basis the court declared the arbitral award (its date is blank in the order) non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, dismissed the Execution Application, disposed of the Notice and any Interim Applications, permitted the parties to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, and excluded the period from invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order for limitation purposes.

Vivekanand

1/2

48-N-606-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

NOTICE NO. 606 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1592/2022

SUNDARAM FINANCE LTD.

….. APPLICANT

VERSUS

POONAM JITENDRA TIWARI AND ANR. ….. RESPONDENTS

None present.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 16^th February, 2026

P.C. :-

1. None appears for the applicant when the matter is called

out.

1. This Notice is filed under the provisions of Order XXI,

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

1. 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

Vivekanand

2/2

48-N-606-2025.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 dated passed by the sole arbitrator is hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

1. Execution Application stands dismissed .

In sequel, Notice & 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.

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.)