Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Ramesh Kumar Gami — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Ramesh Kumar Gami — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Respective arbitral awards (passed under unilaterally appointed sole arbitrators) set aside; the Commercial Execution / Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons dismissed / disposed; parties permitted to initiate fresh arbitration with the period from invocation till the date of the order excluded for limitation; liberty to apply where an express written agreement under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waives the ineligibility.

Issue for consideration

Whether arbitral awards passed under a unilaterally appointed sole arbitrator can stand, in light of the Supreme Court's observation that unilateral appointment is void ab initio. +1 more

Court's answer

Acting in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International, since the appointment of the sole arbitrator in all these matters was found to be unilateral, 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, stand dismissed / disposed following the setting aside of the awards.

Key takeaways

It is open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.ratio¶17
For limitation purposes, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till the date of this order shall be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶18
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

Arbitration — Unilateral appointment of sole arbitrator — Batch order (Serial Nos. 901 to 1149), Abhay Ahuja, J., 20th April 2026 — Matters listed in view of Supreme Court decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India, 2026 SCC Online SC 7, observing that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage, even in execution — Office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master found appointment of sole arbitrator unilateral in all matters — Respective arbitral awards stand set aside — Commercial Execution / Execution Applications and connected Interim Applications and Chamber Summons stand dismissed / disposed — Parties free to initiate fresh arbitration in accordance with law — Period from invocation of arbitration till date of order excluded for limitation — Liberty to apply where express agreement in writing in terms of proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waives ineligibility of sole arbitrator or right to object.

901 to 1149.doc

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

SERIAL NOS. 901 TO 1149

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O, M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Serial No. 905, 924, 926, 963 and 1078.

Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b SG Legal and Associates for the Applicant in Serial No. 908,909,910,926,983,1041,1100 and 1102.

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Serial No. 921 to 923.

Mr. Sangram B. Suryavanshi for the Applicant in Serial No. 1120.

CORAM : ABHAY AHUJA, J. DATE : 20^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.

Digitally signed by NIKITA NIKITA YOGESH YOGESH GADGIL GADGIL Date: 2026.04.20 15:47:01 +0530

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

Nikita Gadgil 1/2

901 to 1149.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