Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Libra Business Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited vs Libra Business Pvt. Ltd. — Arbitration | Bombay HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Execution Application and connected Interim Application dismissed/disposed; arbitral award dated 8th August, 2024 set aside; parties free to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings; limitation period from invocation till the date of this order excluded; liberty to apply in respect of an express written waiver under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.

Issue for consideration

Whether the arbitral award dated 8th August, 2024 is valid and executable given that the appointment of the sole arbitrator was unilateral. +1 more

Court's answer

Relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airports Authority of India (unilateral appointment of arbitrator void ab initio; ineligibility raisable at any stage, even in execution), this Court set aside the arbitral award dated 8th August, 2024, the sole arbitrator's appointment having been found unilateral.

Ratio / Principle

The Execution Application and the connected Interim Application stand dismissed/disposed.

Key takeaways

It is 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 today is to be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.ratio¶¶16
Liberty granted 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).obiter

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Abhay Ahuja, J.), Interim Application No. 2848 of 2025 in Execution Application No. 1234 of 2025 (Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited v. Libra Business Pvt. Ltd.), decided 5th May, 2026: On the learned Associate's finding that the sole arbitrator's appointment was unilateral, and relying on the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. 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), the Court set aside the arbitral award dated 8th August, 2024 and dismissed/disposed of the Execution Application and the connected Interim Application. Parties were left free to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings; the period from invocation of arbitration till the date of the order was excluded for limitation; and liberty to apply was granted in the event an express agreement in writing under the proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 waived the sole arbitrator's ineligibility or the right to object under Section 12(5).

34-IA-2848-2025.doc

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

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 2848 OF 2025 IN

EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 1234 OF 2025

Kotak Mahindra Bank Limited … Applicant Versus Libra Business Pvt. Ltd. … Respondent

None Present.

CORAM	: ABHAY AHUJA, J.
DATE	: 5^thMay, 2026

P.C. :

In this matter, it has been found by the learned Associate of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral.

Accordingly, 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, the arbitral award dated 8^th August, 2024 stands set aside. The Execution Application is not on board. It is taken on board and the Execution

1 2026 SCC Online SC 7

Mandar M. 1/2

34-IA-2848-2025.doc

Application and the connected Interim Application 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.)

Mandar M. 2/2