Fedbank Financial Services Limited vs S K Facility Services — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Fedbank Financial Services Limited vs S K Facility Services — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law; the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation purposes; liberty to apply where an express agreement in writing under 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).

Issue for consideration

Whether the respective arbitral awards, passed in matters where the appointment of the sole arbitrator was found to be unilateral, should be set aside, with consequential disposal of the pending Commercial Execution / Execution Applications, Interim Applications and Chamber Summons. +1 more

Court's answer

Since in all these matters the appointment of the sole arbitrator was found to be unilateral, in view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India, 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 the 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 (Abhay Ahuja, J.), 17 April 2026 — Batch disposal of Commercial Execution / Execution Applications (Serial Nos. 901 to 942, 944 to 1132, 1138, 1141 and 1145). Listing the matters in view of the 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 upon 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; the Commercial Execution / Execution Applications, connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons stood dismissed / disposed. Parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law, with the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation, and liberty to apply where an express agreement in writing under the proviso to Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, waives the arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object.

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