Bombay High Court
SHRIRAM CITY UNION FINANCE LIMITEDversusVASANT KODU SHETTY AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
- Bench
- RAJESH S PATIL
Holding
The arbitral award is declared non‑existent in law, non‑executable and void‑ab‑initio because the arbitrator’s appointment was unilateral.
Summary
The High Court considered an execution application filed by Shriram City Union Finance Ltd. based on an arbitral award whose arbitrator had been appointed unilaterally. Relying on the Supreme Court’s decision in Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. v. Airport Authority of India (Civil Appeal Nos. 37‑38 of 2026) and the earlier High Court judgment in L&T Finance Ltd. v. Sangeeta Bhansali (Commercial Execution Application No. 5277 of 2022), the Court held that an award can be set aside as void‑ab‑initio even at the execution stage on the ground of improper appointment. Consequently, the Court granted the claimant’s request to withdraw the execution application, declared the award non‑existent in law and non‑executable, and ordered the application and related interim applications to be disposed of. The parties were permitted to commence fresh arbitration proceedings, with the period spent in the earlier arbitration excluded for limitation purposes.
Issues considered
- Can an arbitral award be set aside as void‑ab‑initio at the execution stage on the ground that the arbitrator was appointed unilaterally?
- Whether the execution application can be withdrawn and the parties allowed to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings?
Subjects
- Arbitration
- Execution proceedings
- Void award
- Unilateral appointment of arbitrator
- Limitation period
- Fresh arbitration
Judgment
Vivekanand
1/2
7-EXA-2100-2018.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2100 OF 2018
WITH
NOTICE NO. 895 OF 2025
IN
EXECUTION APPLICATION NO. 2100 OF 2018
Shriram City Union Finance Limited ….. Claimant
Versus
Vasant Kodu Shetty & Anr. ….. Respondents
Mr. Vishal V. Narkar, Advocate for the Claimant.
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
DATE : 24th 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
7-EXA-2100-2018.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, 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.