Shriram Finance Co.Ltd vs Subjhash Shamarav Pawar — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Shriram Finance Co.Ltd vs Subjhash Shamarav Pawar — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The respective arbitral awards stand set aside on account of unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator; the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications and the connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons, if any, stand dismissed / disposed; parties are open to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation; liberty to apply reserved where an express written waiver in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 exists.

Issue for consideration

Whether, the appointment of the sole arbitrator having been found unilateral in all these matters, the respective arbitral awards should be set aside in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India. +2 more

Court's answer

In all these matters, since the appointment of the sole arbitrator was found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master to be unilateral, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India.

Ratio / Principle

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.

Key takeaways

For limitation, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order is to be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶¶19
Liberty to apply is reserved in the event 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) of the said Act.obiter¶¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Abhay Ahuja, J.), 24 April 2026 — batch of Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications (Serial Nos. 902, 904 to 933, 935 to 949, 951 to 1108, 1110, 1112 to 1123, 1128 to 1141, 1143 to 1151). The matters were listed in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India, 2026 SCC Online SC 7, where the Supreme Court observed that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage, even in execution. As the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master found the appointment of the sole arbitrator to be unilateral in all these matters, the Court set aside the respective arbitral awards and the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications, with connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons, if any, stood dismissed / disposed. It was declared open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, with the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation. Liberty to apply was granted in the event an express agreement in writing in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waives the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator 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