KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. SMITA M. JADHAV (EMPHASIS LAW) vs GURJEET SINGH PYARA SINGH BASSAN — EXA/322/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020002502019

Filing Number

EXA/31/2019

Filing Date

04-Jan-2019

Registration No

EXA/322/2023

Registration Date

22-Feb-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay Ahuja

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay Ahuja

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. SMITA M. JADHAV (EMPHASIS LAW)

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.GURJEET SINGH PYARA SINGH BASSAN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, except where express written agreements waive ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

    For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay Ahuja

  4. 06-Jan-2023

    Shri. S. B. Bhansali (Prothonotary Senior Master))View PDF

  5. 11-Nov-2022

    Shri. S. B. Bhansali (Prothonotary Senior Master))View PDF

  6. 11-Nov-2022

    First hearing

    Initial hearing scheduled

  7. 04-Jan-2019

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/322/2023

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, relying on the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, except where express written agreements waive ineligibility under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case