BAJAJ FINANCE LTD. vs PRAKASH BHOSLE AND ANR. — EXA/436/2022

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2). Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020005792022

Filing Number

EXA/578/2022

Filing Date

07-Jan-2022

Registration No

EXA/436/2022

Registration Date

19-Mar-2022

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BAJAJ FINANCE LTD.

    Adv. Sandeep D Rankhambe,SANTOSH P. JAWALE,SANTOSH P. JAWALE, SANTOSH P. JAWALE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.PRAKASH BHOSLE AND ANR.

  2. 2.PRAKASH TRADERS

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. PatilView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed Bajaj Finance Ltd.'s execution application and declared the arbitral award void-ab-initio because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally. Following a Supreme Court judgment from January 2026, the court held that an arbitral award can be set aside at the execution stage on grounds of defective arbitrator appointment. The parties are permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, with the limitation period excluded from the initial arbitration invocation date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    For Dismissal Under Rule 329

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

  4. 07-Jan-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/436/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed Bajaj Finance Ltd.'s execution application and declared the arbitral award void-ab-initio because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally. Following a Supreme Court judgment from January 2026, the court held that an arbitral award can be set aside at the execution stage on grounds of defective arbitrator appointment. The parties are permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, with the limitation period excluded from the initial arbitration invocation date. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case