Indusind Bank Limited vs Ansari Mohd Ashraf Mohd Umar and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Indusind Bank Limited vs Ansari Mohd Ashraf Mohd Umar and Anr. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Arbitral awards declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio; Execution Applications dismissed; Notices and Interim Applications disposed of; parties left free to initiate fresh arbitration with the period from invocation of arbitration till the order date excluded for limitation.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards passed by a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator remain executable at the stage of execution, or can be set aside as void-ab-initio. +1 more

Court's answer

Following the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Airport Authority of India (and the Court's earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr.), the arbitral awards in the present proceedings passed by the unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator are declared non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Applications stand dismissed.

Key takeaways

It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶53
For limitation purposes, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order shall stand excluded for initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶54

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (O.O.C.J.), Rajesh S. Patil, J., 2 February 2026 — Six Notices (97–102 N/946, 947, 948, 949, 950, 969 of 2025) filed in 2025 under Order XXI, Rule 22 CPC in Execution Applications EXA/418, 417, 408, 425, 400 and 424 of 2021 by IndusInd Bank Ltd. against Inam Mohammed Patel & Anr., Ansari Mohd Ashraf Mohd Umar & Anr., Rampadaras Yadav & Anr., Nizam Ahmed Chaudhari & Anr., Kalu Khalil Khan & Anr. and Kundan Prabhakar Bhandare & Anr. None appeared for the Applicant. Noting that the sole arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally, and acting on the Supreme Court's decision of 5 January 2026 in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. Airport Authority of India, Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026 (as considered in the Court's earlier view in L & T Finance Ltd. vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr., Commercial Execution Application (L) No. 5277 of 2022), the Court 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, and declared the arbitral awards in these proceedings non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio. The Execution Applications stood dismissed; the Notices and Interim Applications stood disposed of; the parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation.

2026:BHC-OS:3222

Diksha Rane 97 TO 102 N 946 2025.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

97 N/946/2025 In

EXA/418/2021

INDUSIND BANK LTD.

VS

INAM MOAHAMMED PATEL AND ANR.

WITH

98 N/947/2025 In EXA/417/2021

INDUSIND BANK LIMITED

VS

ANSARI MOHD ASHRAF MOHD UMAR AND ANR

WITH

99 N/948/2025 In EXA/408/2021

INDUSLAND BANK LIMITED VS

RAMPADARAS YADAV AND ANR.

WITH

100 N/949/2025

In

EXA/425/2021

INDUSIND BANK LIMITED

VS

NIZAM AHMED CHAUDHARI AND ANR

WITH

101 N/950/2025 In EXA/400/2021

1

Diksha Rane 97 TO 102 N 946 2025.doc

INDUSIND BANK LIMITED VS

KALU KHALIL KHAN AND ANR

WITH 102 N/969/2025 In EXA/424/2021

INDUSIND BANK LIMITED

VS KUNDAN PRABHAKAR BHANDARE AND ANR

None present.

CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

DATE : 2 FEBRUARY 2026.

P.C. :

These Notices are filed under the provisions of Order

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

None appears for the Applicant when the matter is called

out.

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

2

Diksha Rane 97 TO 102 N 946 2025.doc

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 awards in the present proceedings passed by the sole arbitrator is hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable and void-ab-initio.

1. Execution Applications stand dismissed.

In sequel, the Notices and 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.)

3

Signed by: Diksha Rane Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 03/02/2026 19:38:41