Shriram Finance Co. Ltd. vs Shaheen Arif Shaikh — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Shriram Finance Co. Ltd. vs Shaheen Arif Shaikh — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respective arbitral awards set aside; Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons dismissed / disposed; parties at liberty to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation; liberty to apply where an express written agreement under the proviso to Section 12(5) waived the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5).

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others v. Airports Authority of India and the finding that the sole arbitrator in these matters was unilaterally appointed, the arbitral awards and the connected execution proceedings must be set aside and dismissed. +2 more

Court's answer

Acting in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others v. Airports Authority of India, and on the finding of the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master that the appointment of the sole arbitrator in each of these matters was unilateral, this Court set aside the respective arbitral awards.

Ratio / Principle

The Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications, and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, accordingly stand dismissed / disposed.

Key takeaways

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶18
For limitation purposes, the period from the invocation of the arbitration until the date of this order is to be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶19
Liberty to apply is reserved for the event that there exists an express agreement in writing in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

BATCH ORDER - EXECUTION APPLICATIONS DISMISSED; ARBITRAL AWARDS SET ASIDE FOR UNILATERAL APPOINTMENT OF SOLE ARBITRATOR (High Court of Judicature at Bombay, OOCJ - Abhay Ahuja, J., 24 April 2026): Acting in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others v. Airports Authority of India (2026 SCC Online SC 7), and on the finding of the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master that the sole arbitrator in each of the listed serial numbers had been unilaterally appointed, the Court set aside the respective arbitral awards and dismissed / disposed the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications together with the connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons. Parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, with the period from the invocation of arbitration till the date of the order to be excluded for limitation purposes. Liberty to apply was preserved where an express agreement in writing under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waived the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5).

902, 904 to 933, 935 to 949, 951 to 1108, 1110,1112 to 1123, 1129 to 1141, 1143 to 1151.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 902, 904 TO 933, 935 TO 949,951 TO 1108, 1110, 1112 TO 1123, 1128 TO 1141, 1143 TO 1151

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O.M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Sr. Nos.902, 904, 933, 936, 937, 947, 948, 951, 986, 1019, 1108, 1110, 1112 to 1115, 1129 & 1142.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Sr. Nos. 939,940 & 942.

Mr. Pawan Kulmakar i/b SG Legal & Associates for the Applicant in Sr. Nos. 945, 952, 975, 976, 977, 983, 984 & 987. None present in other matters.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 24^th April 2026

PC:-

All these matters have been listed in view of the decision of the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhadra International (India) Pvt.

Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India¹ where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution.

Since in all these matters it has been found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral, in view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2026.04.24 18:08:42 +0530

902, 904 to 933, 935 to 949, 951 to 1108, 1110,1112 to 1123, 1129 to 1141, 1143 to 1151.doc

and the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications, and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, accordingly stand dismissed / disposed.

It would be open to 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 be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

Liberty to apply in the event there exists an express agreement in writing in terms of proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the “said Act”) waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the said Act.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

Nikita Gadgil 2/2