Bajaj Finance Ltd. vs Mastech Power Trading — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Bajaj Finance Ltd. vs Mastech Power Trading — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

The respective arbitral awards were set aside and the Commercial Execution / Execution Applications, connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons (if any) stood dismissed / disposed; parties at liberty to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law; the period from invocation of the 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) waives the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object.

Issue for consideration

Whether, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India, the arbitral awards in these matters, passed by sole arbitrators whose appointment was found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master to be unilateral, should be set aside, with consequential disposal of the execution applications and directions for fresh arbitration.

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

It would be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶17
As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order is to be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶18
Liberty to apply 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).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction (Abhay Ahuja, J.; 17 April 2026) — batch of Commercial Execution / Execution Applications, Serial Nos. 901 to 942, 944 to 1132, 1138, 1141 and 1145, listed in view of the Supreme Court decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others v. Airports Authority of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 7, wherein the Supreme Court observed that unilateral appointment of an arbitrator is void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage, even in execution. The office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master found that in all these matters the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral. Held: (i) in view of the Supreme Court decision, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside; (ii) the Commercial Execution / Execution Applications, connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons, if any, stand dismissed / disposed; (iii) the parties are at liberty to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law; (iv) the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order is to be excluded for limitation in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings; and (v) liberty to apply where 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).

901 to 942, 944 to 1132, 1138, 1141 and 1145.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 942, 944 TO 1132, 1138, 1141 AND 1145

Mr. Darshit K. Jain, through VC with Ms. Nisha Parmar i/b Mr. Tushar Goradia for the Applicants in Sr. No. 902.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O. M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicants in Sr. No. 939,941,1131,1138 and 1141 to 1145.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNPLegal for the Applicant in Sr. No.1025 & 1026. Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b SG Legal & Associates for the Applicants in Sr. No. 1046, 1091 and 1106.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 17^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

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2026.04.17 20:47:49 +0530

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

901 to 942, 944 to 1132, 1138, 1141 and 1145.doc

and the Commercial Execution / 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