Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Makdoom Lalamahamad Patel — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Ltd. vs Makdoom Lalamahamad Patel — 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 (if any) dismissed / disposed; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law, excluding from limitation the period from invocation of the arbitration till today; liberty to apply where an express agreement in writing waives the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Issue for consideration

Whether the arbitral awards in these execution matters, having arisen from unilateral appointment of the sole arbitrator, fall to be set aside in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India. +2 more

Court's answer

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

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶18
As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today is to be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶19
Liberty to apply is 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).

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Batch order (Serial Nos. 901-903 and 905-1150), High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Abhay Ahuja J., 23 April 2026 - Acting on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others v. Airports Authority of India, 2026 SCC Online SC 7 (unilateral appointment of arbitrator void ab initio; ineligibility raisable at any stage, even in execution), and on the finding of the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master that the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral in all these matters, the Court set aside the respective arbitral awards and dismissed / disposed of the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications together with the connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons; the parties may initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, with the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today excluded for limitation; liberty to apply reserved where an express agreement in writing, per the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, waives the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5).

901 to 903 and 905 to 1150.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 903 AND 905 to 1150

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Sr. No. 1068. Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O.M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Sr. No.1006, 1007, 1024 and 1025

Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b SG Legal & Associates for the Applicant in Sr. No. 910, 911, 1009, 1018, 1019, 1089, 1093, 1096, 1098, 1100, 1103, 1105, 1106, 1107, 1109 to 1116, 1022 and 1023. None present in other matters.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 23^rd 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 and the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications,

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL

Digitally signed by NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL Date: 2026.04.23 16:41:27 +0530

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

901 to 903 and 905 to 1150.doc

and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, stand accordingly 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