India Infoline Finance Limited vs Aftab Alam Mohammad Yunus and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

India Infoline Finance Limited vs Aftab Alam Mohammad Yunus and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Execution Applications dismissed; arbitral awards declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; Notices and Interim Applications disposed of; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration with the period from invocation of arbitration till 12 February 2026 excluded for limitation.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards passed pursuant to unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator remain executable at the execution stage, or are void-ab-initio and non-est in law. +1 more

Court's answer

Following its earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali and the Supreme Court's judgment in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (decided 5 January 2026), the Court declared the arbitral awards in these proceedings, passed by unilaterally appointed sole arbitrators, to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Applications stand dismissed.

Key takeaways

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶53
As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order stands excluded for the purpose of initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶54

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Rajesh S. Patil, J. — Batch of six Execution Applications (EXA/833/2022, EXA/822/2022, EXA/829/2022, EXA/676/2022, EXA/738/2022, EXA/983/2022, with Notices N/372/2025, N/542/2025, N/543/2025, N/658/2025, N/659/2025, N/689/2025 of 2025) by Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, SBI Cards and Payments/Payment Services entities and India Infoline Finance Limited against their respective borrowers — None appeared for applicants or respondents — Court observed that the appointment of the sole arbitrators in the underlying arbitrations was unilateral — Relying on its own earlier judgment in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. (Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022) and the Supreme Court's judgment of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal Nos. 37-38 of 2026), which held 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 — Held: the arbitral awards in these proceedings are non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; the Execution Applications stand dismissed; Notices and Interim Applications, if any, stand disposed of; parties may initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till 12 February 2026 excluded for limitation.

KVM

1/3

21, 27, 28, 32 TO 34 - N 372 OF 2025.doc

Digitally signed byKANCHAN KANCHAN VINOD VINOD MAYEKAR MAYEKAR Date: 2026.02.13 18:08:14 +0530

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

21 N/372/2025 IN

EXA/833/2022

SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED. VS

HAKIMALI WAHIDALI SHAH (BORROWER) & ANR.

27 N/542/2025 IN

EXA/822/2022

SBI CARDS AND PAYMENTS SERVICES PVT. LTD VS

H SAWGHNEY

28 N/543/2025 IN

EXA/829/2022

SBI CARDS AND PAYMENTS

SERVICES PVT LTD

VS

M H HINGORA

32 N/658/2025 IN

EXA/676/2022

INDIA INFOLINE FINANCE LIMITED VS

RAJESH BALCHANDRA KOLI (BORROWER) & 2 ORS.

33 N/659/2025

IN

EXA/738/2022

INDIA INFOLINE FINANCE LIMITED VS

AFTAB ALAM MOHAMMAD YUNUS & ANR

KVM

2/3

21, 27, 28, 32 TO 34 - N 372 OF 2025.doc

34 N/689/2025 IN

EXA/983/2022 SBI CARDS AND PAYMENT SERVICES LTD. VS

NITIN R. PAWAR

None for the Applicants.

None for the Respondents.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 12^th FEBRUARY, 2026

P.C. :-

1. None appears for the applicants when the matters are

called out.

From the proceedings, it can be gathered that the appointment of the sole arbitrators 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

KVM

3/3

21, 27, 28, 32 TO 34 - N 372 OF 2025.doc

arbitrator was unilateral.

In view of the aforesaid judgment, the arbitral awards in the present proceedings passed by the sole arbitrators are hereby

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

1. Execution Applications stand dismissed .

In sequel, the Notices & 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.)