HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED vs IFFAT ART — EXA/2499/2024
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th April 2026.
CNR: HCBM020094112023
Filing Number
EXA/9407/2023
Filing Date
03-Apr-2023
Registration No
EXA/2499/2024
Registration Date
05-Sep-2024
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
15-Apr-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 25-May-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.HDB FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
Adv. SG Legal and Associates
Respondent(s)
-
1.IFFAT ART
-
2.MOHD IDRISH KHAN
-
3.MAHEMUDA MOHD. HDIS KHAN
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
15-Apr-2026
Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF
The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, following the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International that such appointments are void ab initio. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the period of the invalidated arbitration from the limitation period, but allowed exceptions where written agreements expressly waive such objections 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.
-
15-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
-
29-Jul-2024
Shri. S. B. Bhansali (Prothonotary Senior Master))View PDF
-
29-Jul-2024
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
03-Apr-2023
Case filed
Registration No. EXA/2499/2024
The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, following the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International that such appointments are void ab initio. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the period of the invalidated arbitration from the limitation period, but allowed exceptions where written agreements expressly waive such objections 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