Bombay High Court
SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LTD.versusRAVINDRA SHANKAR GAIKAR AND ANR
- Decided
- Disposal
- WITHDRAWN
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
An arbitral award is void ab initio and non‑executable where the arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, even at the execution stage.
Summary
The claimant filed an execution application based on an arbitral award, contending that the arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally. The claimant sought leave to withdraw the execution proceedings and to commence fresh arbitration. The court, relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India, held that an award can be set aside at the execution stage if the arbitrator’s appointment was unilateral, rendering the award void ab initio. Accordingly, the court declared the award non‑existent, non‑executable, and void, and granted the request to withdraw the execution application. The execution application was disposed of as withdrawn, and the parties were permitted to initiate fresh arbitration, with the period from the original arbitration’s commencement excluded for limitation purposes.
Issues considered
- Whether an arbitral award can be set aside at the execution stage on the ground that the arbitrator was appointed unilaterally.
- Whether the execution application should be withdrawn and the parties allowed to commence fresh arbitration proceedings.
Subjects
- arbitration
- arbitral award
- unilateral appointment
- void ab initio
- execution proceedings
- limitation period
- fresh arbitration
Judgment
Vivekanand
1/2
5-EXA-2082-2022.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2082 OF 2022
WITH
NOTICE NO. 763 OF 2025
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2082 OF 2022
Shriram City Union Finance Limited ….. Claimant
Versus
Ravindra Shankar Gaikar And Anr. ….. Respondents
Mr. Vishal V. Narkar, Advocate for the Claimant.
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 27th MARCH, 2026
P.C. :-
1) Mr. Narkar, 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, he on
instructions of his 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.
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
Vivekanand
2/2
5-EXA-2082-2022.doc
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.)
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.