Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs Shaikh Salem Nisar — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. vs Shaikh Salem Nisar — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respective arbitral awards set aside notwithstanding dismissal of the Commercial Execution Applications; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law; period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order excluded for limitation; liberty to apply where an express written agreement waives the Section 12(5) ineligibility.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards secured through a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can stand and be enforced via Commercial Execution Applications, in view of the Supreme Court's observation that unilateral appointment is void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised even in execution. +1 more

Court's answer

In all these matters, since the appointment of the sole arbitrator was found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master to have been unilateral, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside.

Ratio / Principle

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

Key takeaways

It would be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶¶15
For limitation purposes, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order is excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶¶16
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

Bombay High Court (Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction), Abhay Ahuja, J., batch order dated 18 April 2026 in Commercial Execution Applications (Serial Nos. 901 to 905, 907 to 997, 999 to 1094, 1096 to 1100, 1103 to 1122 and 1142 to 1152). Acting on the finding of the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master that the appointment of the sole arbitrator had been unilateral in all these matters, and in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India (2026 SCC Online SC 7) — that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution — the Court set aside the respective arbitral awards and dismissed / disposed of the Commercial Execution Applications, the connected Interim Applications and any Chamber Summons. The parties were permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law; the period from invocation of the arbitration till the date of the order was directed to be excluded for limitation; and liberty to apply was granted where an express agreement in writing in terms of 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 905, 907 to 997, 999 to 1094, 1096 to 1100, 1103 to 1122 and 1142 to 1152.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 905, 907 TO 997, 999 TO 1094, 1096 TO 1100, 1103 TO 1122 AND 1142 TO 1152

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O. M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Sr. No. 914,918,921,922,927,928,938,999,1085,1086,1097 to 1100, 1103 to 1109 and 1112 to 1118.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Sr. No. 1096.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 18^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 and the Commercial Execution Applications and the connected Interim

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

901 to 905, 907 to 997, 999 to 1094, 1096 to 1100, 1103 to 1122 and 1142 to 1152.doc

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.)

Digitally
signed by
NIKITA
NIKITA YOGESH
YOGESH GADGIL
GADGIL Date:
2026.04.18
17:20:01
+0530

Nikita Gadgil 2/2