M/S. L AND T FINANCE LTD. vs SUNILKUMAR V S/O VASANTHAPPA — EXA/1025/2015

Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 08th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020016222015

Filing Number

EXA/90/2015

Filing Date

20-Jan-2015

Registration No

EXA/1025/2015

Registration Date

04-Jun-2015

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

08-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 19-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.M/S. L AND T FINANCE LTD.

    Adv. Disha Karambar and Associates

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUNILKUMAR V S/O VASANTHAPPA

  2. 2.C. KAVITHA W/O SUNILKUMAR V

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 08-May-2026

    —View PDF

    The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in consolidated proceedings against Sunil Kumar V and C. Kavitha because the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Following Supreme Court precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed execution applications and allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding prior limitation periods. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 08-May-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. 20-Jan-2015

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/1025/2015

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in consolidated proceedings against Sunil Kumar V and C. Kavitha because the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Following Supreme Court precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed execution applications and allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding prior limitation periods. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case