Disposed

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. v. Suresh Parbatbhai Der

Bombay HC5 May 2026EXA/659/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Batch of commercial execution applications where the sole arbitrator's appointment was found unilateral. Following Bhadra International, the court set aside the arbitral awards and dismissed/disposed the execution applications, permitting fresh arbitration with limitation exclusion.

What did the court decide?

Arbitral awards set aside; execution applications dismissed/disposed; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration with limitation period from invocation to date excluded.

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. vs Suresh… — Execution and Attachment | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

902 to 1148.doc

¶2

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

¶3

SERIAL NOS. 902 TO 909, 911 TO 924, 926 TO 938, 941 TO 981, 983 TO 988, 993 TO 1002, 1005, 1007 TO 1021, 1023 TO 1026, 1032 TO 1047, 1049 TO 1073, 1075 TO 1110, 1113 TO 1135, 1137 TO 1148

¶4

None appears for the parties.

¶5

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 5^th MAY, 2026

¶6

PC:-

¶7

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.

¶8

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

¶9

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

¶10

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

¶11

902 to 1148.doc

¶12

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

¶13

As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

¶14

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.

¶15

NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL

¶16

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)

¶17

Digitally signed by NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL Date: 2026.05.06 19:15:11 +0530

¶18

Nikita Gadgil 2/2

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. v. Suresh Parbatbhai Der

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. v. Suresh Parbatbhai Der

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shriram Finance Limited vs Nadim Aliasgar Khan

Bajaj Finance Limited vs Neeraj Kumar Ramjit Upadhyay

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Nazmeen Tanveer Shah

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. vs Rishi Bundela

Tata Captial Financial Services Ltd. vs Nirav Jagdishbhai Gohil

Pioneer Finance Company Pvt. Ltd. vs Rahul Nanda Chimulgi