L AND T FINANCE LTD. vs SUMIT KUMAR AND 2 ORS. — EXA/2300/2015

Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 17th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020101482015

Filing Number

EXA/810/2015

Filing Date

08-Apr-2015

Registration No

EXA/2300/2015

Registration Date

28-Oct-2015

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

17-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.L AND T FINANCE LTD.

    Adv. S. I. Joshi and Co.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SUMIT KUMAR AND 2 ORS.

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF

    Summary of EXA/2300/2015 - L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sumit Kumar & Ors. The High Court of Bombay set aside the arbitral awards and dismissed the execution applications following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International decision that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court found the sole arbitrator's appointment in this case was unilateral and accordingly invalidated all related execution and interim applications. The parties were permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the previous arbitration period excluded from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Jun-2026

    For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

  4. 08-Apr-2015

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/2300/2015

casestatus.in Summary

Summary of EXA/2300/2015 - L & T Finance Ltd. v. Sumit Kumar & Ors. The High Court of Bombay set aside the arbitral awards and dismissed the execution applications following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International decision that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court found the sole arbitrator's appointment in this case was unilateral and accordingly invalidated all related execution and interim applications. The parties were permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the previous arbitration period excluded from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case