Shriram Finance Ltd. vs Ramkripal Rambhai Vishwakarma — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Shriram Finance Ltd. vs Ramkripal Rambhai Vishwakarma — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respective arbitral awards set aside; Commercial Execution / Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons dismissed / disposed; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, excluding from limitation the period from invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order; liberty to apply where an express written agreement waives the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards rendered pursuant to a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator should be set aside, and the connected Commercial Execution / Execution Applications dismissed or disposed. +2 more

Court's answer

In view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India (unilateral appointment of arbitrator void ab initio; ineligibility raisable at any stage, even in execution), and the finding that the appointment of the sole arbitrator had been 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
For limitation purposes, 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 granted 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.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Batch order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Abhay Ahuja J., dated 20 April 2026, in Commercial Execution / Execution Applications bearing Serial Nos. 901 to 1149. The matters were listed in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. 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 the ineligibility can be raised at any stage, even in execution. Upon the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master finding that the appointment of the sole arbitrator had been unilateral in all these matters, the Court set aside the respective arbitral awards and dismissed / disposed of the Commercial Execution / Execution Applications together with the connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons, if any. The parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order to be excluded for limitation. Liberty to apply was granted in the event an express agreement in writing exists, in terms of the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, waiving the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5).

901 to 1149.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 1149

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O, M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Serial No. 905, 924, 926, 963 and 1078.

Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b SG Legal and Associates for the Applicant in Serial No. 908,909,910,926,983,1041,1100 and 1102.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Serial No. 921 to 923.

Mr. Sangram B. Suryavanshi for the Applicant in Serial No. 1120.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 20^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.

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2026.04.20 15:47:01 +0530

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

901 to 1149.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