Disposed

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rakesh K Pandey

Bombay HC20 Feb 2026N/652/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Unilateral appointment of arbitrator; arbitral award void-ab-initio and non-executable at execution stage; withdrawal of execution application with liberty for fresh arbitration; limitation exclusion from invocation of arbitration; HDFC Bank Ltd vs. Rakesh K Pandey; Bombay High Court OOCJ; Notice No. 652 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 1866/2022; relies on Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Lt

What did the court decide?

Leave to withdraw the execution application with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law; the Arbitral Award declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio

Hdfc Bank Ltd. Vs Rakesh K Pandey — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Vivekanand

1/2

39-N-652-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶5

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶6

NOTICE NO. 652 OF 2025

¶7

¶8

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1866/2022

HDFC BANK LTD

….. APPLICANT

VERSUS

RAKESH K PANDEY

….. RESPONDENT

Ms. Bijal Gogri, Advocate for the Applicant.

¶15

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

¶16

DATE : 20^th FEBRUARY, 2026

¶17

P.C. :-

¶18

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.

¶19

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

39-N-652-2025.doc

International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. Airport Authority of

¶24

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.

¶25

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

¶26

3.1) The Arbitral Award which is subject matter of the present

¶27

proceedings is hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

¶28

1. Execution Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.

¶29

In sequel, Notice & the Interim Applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

¶30

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

¶31

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.

¶32

(RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rakesh K Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hdfc Bank Ltd. v. Rakesh K Pandey

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases