SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED) vs MOHD ASHRAF CHOUDHARY — EXA/1824/2025

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 04th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020078692024

Filing Number

EXA/7867/2024

Filing Date

06-Mar-2024

Registration No

EXA/1824/2025

Registration Date

09-Sep-2025

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

04-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 20-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LIMITED)

    Adv. adv amol shinde

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MOHD ASHRAF CHOUDHARY

  2. 2.ZAKIR HUSAIN AKHTAR HUSAIN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 04-May-2026

    —View PDF

    The Bombay High Court set aside all arbitral awards in consolidated matters involving Shriram Finance Limited and others, finding that the sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed in violation of arbitration law. Following Supreme Court precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, while permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with time limitations waived for the period of previous proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 04-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. 06-Mar-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/1824/2025

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court set aside all arbitral awards in consolidated matters involving Shriram Finance Limited and others, finding that the sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed in violation of arbitration law. Following Supreme Court precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, while permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with time limitations waived for the period of previous proceedings. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case