Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Aamir Khan — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Aditya Birla Finance Limited vs Aamir Khan — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Arbitral awards set aside; Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications 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 waives Section 12(5) ineligibility.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards obtained pursuant to a unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator could be enforced at the execution stage, warranting setting aside of the awards and dismissal/disposal of the Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications.

Court's answer

The arbitral awards, having flowed from a unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator, are set aside, and the Execution Applications together with the connected Interim Applications stand dismissed/disposed.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

For purposes of limitation, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order stands excluded while initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶23
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).ratio¶27

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Abhay Ahuja J., 21 April 2026 — In three execution-stage matters, viz. I.A. No. 2485 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 7 of 2026 (Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Medanta Hospital), I.A. No. 3262 of 2025 in Commercial Execution Application No. 50 of 2025 (Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. Bikram Sahu) and I.A. No. 5483 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 2170 of 2025 (Aditya Birla Finance Limited v. Aamir Khan), counsel submitted that the arbitral awards flowed from a unilateral appointment of the Arbitrator and relied on Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India, 2026 SCC OnLine SC 7 (Supreme Court observing unilateral appointment of arbitrator void ab initio, ineligibility raisable at any stage and even in execution). Acting on that position, the Court set aside the arbitral awards and the Execution Applications along with connected Interim Applications stood dismissed/disposed. Parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law; the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order was directed to be excluded for limitation; and liberty to apply was reserved where an express agreement in writing under the proviso to Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waives the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5). Vedika Pedhambkar (i/b Akhil Modi and Associates) appeared for the Applicants; none appeared for the Respondents.

36-IA-2485-2025.38-IA-3262-2025-44-IA-5483-2025doc

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

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2485 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 7 OF 2026

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED )...APPLICANT V/s. MEDANTA HOSPITAL )...RESPONDENT AND

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3262 OF 2025 IN COMMERCIAL EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 50 OF 2025

ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LIMITED )...APPLICANT V/s. BIKRAM SAHU )...RESPONDENT

AND

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 5483 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2170 OF 2025

ADITYA BIRLA FINANCE LIMITED )...APPLICANT

V/s.

AAMIR KHAN )...RESPONDENT

Ms.Vedika Pedhambkar i/b Akhil Modi and Associates, Advocate for the Applicants.

None for the Respondents.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 21^st APRIL 2026

avk 1/3

36-IA-2485-2025.38-IA-3262-2025-44-IA-5483-2025doc

P.C. :

Ms.Vedika Pedhambkar, learned Counsel, appears for the Applicants in these matters and submits that in these matters there has been a unilateral appointment of Arbitrator and this Court may pass appropriate orders in view of the decision in the case of Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. Airports Authority of India¹ , where the Hon’ble Supreme Court has clearly observed that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution.

In view of the aforesaid, the arbitral awards are set aside and the Execution Applications as well as the connected Interim Applications 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.

1 2026 SCC OnLine SC 7.

avk 2/3

36-IA-2485-2025.38-IA-3262-2025-44-IA-5483-2025doc

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.)

ARTI VILAS KHATATE

Digitally signed by ARTI VILAS KHATATE Date: 2026.04.22 10:49:24 +0530

avk 3/3