VISAGE HOLDINGS AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs SHARDA FASHION THROUGH PROPRIETOR RAJESH PRAJAPATI AND 2 ORS. — EXA/49/2023
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 09th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM020010482022
Filing Number
EXA/1047/2022
Filing Date
11-Jan-2022
Registration No
EXA/49/2023
Registration Date
17-Jan-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
Petitioner(s)
-
1.VISAGE HOLDINGS AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED
Adv. Mangesh Subhash Puri
Respondent(s)
-
1.SHARDA FASHION THROUGH PROPRIETOR RAJESH PRAJAPATI AND 2 ORS.
-
2.PRAJAPATI SUNITA RAJESH
-
3.INDRAJEET R. PRAJAPATI
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
09-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF
The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards in cases where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Bhadra International that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, subject to any written waiver agreements 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.
-
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
-
11-Jan-2022
Case filed
Registration No. EXA/49/2023
The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards in cases where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's ruling in Bhadra International that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, subject to any written waiver agreements 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