Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs Rupali Pravin Kamble — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs Rupali Pravin Kamble — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Leave to withdraw Execution Application No. 1805/2022 granted with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration; the underlying Arbitral Award declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; the Notice and any Interim Applications disposed of; period from invocation of the arbitration till the order date excluded for limitation for the fresh arbitration proceedings.

Issue for consideration

Whether an Arbitral Award founded on a unilaterally appointed arbitrator remains executable at the stage of execution, or can be set aside as void-ab-initio even at that stage. +2 more

Court's answer

The Court declared the Arbitral Award which is the subject matter of the present proceedings to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio, adopting the position (per the Supreme Court's judgment of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India, and the author-judge's earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr.) that an award passed under a unilaterally appointed arbitrator can be set aside even at the stage of execution.

Ratio / Principle

Leave and liberty as prayed for — to withdraw the execution application and to pursue fresh arbitration — is granted.

Key takeaways

For limitation purposes, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order stands excluded for initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶31

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Rajesh S. Patil, J. — Notice No. 700 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 1805/2022; Shriram City Union Finance Ltd (claimant) v. Rupali Pravin Kamble (respondent); order dated 20 February 2026. The execution proceedings arose out of an Arbitral Award in which the Arbitrator's appointment was unilateral. Acting on the claimant's request for withdrawal with liberty for fresh arbitration, and relying on the Supreme Court judgment of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India, Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026 — which held that even at the stage of execution an arbitral award can be set aside being void-ab-initio on the ground of unilateral appointment of the arbitrator — together with the author-judge's earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr., Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022, the Court declared the Arbitral Award non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; granted leave and liberty to withdraw the execution application and to initiate fresh arbitration; disposed of the Notice and Interim Applications; and directed that the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order stand excluded for limitation for initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

Vivekanand

1/2

40-N-700-2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

NOTICE NO. 700 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1805/2022

SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD

….. CLAIMANT

VERSUS

RUPALI PRAVIN KAMBLE

….. RESPONDENT

Adv. Vishal V. Narkar, Advocate for the Claimant.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 20^th FEBRUARY, 2026

P.C. :-

Mr. Narkar, 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

40-N-700-2025.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.

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.)