Bombay High Court

HDFC BANK LTD.versusVIVEK JITENDRA SINGH

Decided: 27 March 2026
Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: RAJESH S PATIL

Holding

The arbitral award is declared void ab initio and non‑executable due to the unilateral appointment of the arbitrator.

Summary

The High Court considered an execution application filed by HDFC Bank against Vivek Jitendra Singh, which was based on an arbitral award. The claimant argued that the arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally, rendering the award void. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal No. 37‑38 of 2026) and the earlier L&T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali judgment, the Court held that an award can be set aside at the execution stage on the ground of a unilateral appointment. Accordingly, the Court declared the award non‑existent, non‑executable and void ab initio, granted the claimant’s request to withdraw the execution application, and allowed the parties to commence fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the period already spent in arbitration from the limitation clock.

Issues considered

Whether an arbitral award is enforceable when the arbitrator was appointed unilaterally
Whether an arbitral award can be set aside at the execution stage on the ground of voidness
What is the effect of such a declaration on the pending execution application

Subjects

arbitration
arbitral award
void ab initio
unilateral appointment
execution
limitation
fresh arbitration

Judgment

Vivekanand
                                       1/3
                                                             2-EXA-2020-2022.doc



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

                   EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2020 OF 2022
                                   WITH
                           NOTICE NO. 227 OF 2025
                                    IN
                   EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2020 OF 2022
                                   WITH
                     CHAMBER SUMMONS NO. 1445 OF 2018
                                    IN
                   EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2020 OF 2022

HDFC Bank Ltd.                                         ….. Claimant
          Versus

Vivek Jitendra Singh                                   ….. Respondent

Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b OM Gujar Law Chambers, Advocate for the
Claimant.

                                     CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.

                                      DATE    : 27th MARCH, 2026

P.C. :-

1)                 Ms. Gogri, learned counsel appearing for the claimant

submits that the execution proceedings arise out of an Arbitral Award,

where the Arbitrator’s appointment was unilateral.           Hence, she on

instructions of her client seeks leave to withdraw the present

execution application, with liberty to initiate fresh arbitration

proceedings.

2)                 I have taken a view in the judgment of L & T Finance Ltd.
Vivekanand
                                   2/3
                                                            2-EXA-2020-2022.doc


vs. Sangeeta Bhansali & Anr. in Commercial Execution Application (L)

No. 5277 of 2022, considering the latest judgment of the Supreme

Court decided on 5 January, 2026, in the matter of Bhadra

International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and others vs. Airport Authority of

India, Civil Appeal No. 37-38 of 2026, wherein it has been held that

even at the stage of execution, an arbitral award can be set aside

being void-ab-initio on the grounds that the appointment of the

arbitrator was unilateral.

3)           Leave and liberty as prayed for, is granted.

3.1)         The Arbitral Award which is subject matter of the present

proceedings is hereby declared to be non-est in law, non-executable

and void-ab-initio.

4)           Execution Application stands disposed of as withdrawn.

5)           In sequel, the Notice & the Interim Applications, if any,

also stand disposed of.

6)           It shall be open for the parties to initiate fresh arbitration

proceedings in accordance with law.

7)           As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the

invocation of the arbitration till today shall stand excluded for the

purpose of initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.

                                                  (RAJESH S. PATIL, J.)
Vivekanand
             3/3
                   2-EXA-2020-2022.doc

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…

Lawyer court records for this case

Associated through the court’s case reference.

Bijal Gogri