Infinity fincorp Solutions Pvt Ltd Tikshta Modi vs Sanvariya Nai — EXA/2350/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure (Maharashtra Amendment) Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 08th June 2026.
CNR: HCBM020119972025
e-Filing Number
16-04-2025
Filing Number
EXA/11997/2025
Filing Date
17-04-2025
Registration No
EXA/2350/2025
Registration Date
31-10-2025
Judge
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA
Coram
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA
Bench Type
Single
Category
EXECUTION ( 15 )
Sub-Category
AWARDS ( 2 )
Judicial Branch
Original
Decision Date
08th June 2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISPOSED OFF
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
Infinity fincorp Solutions Pvt Ltd Tikshta Modi
Respondent(s)
Sanvariya Nai
Kavita Devi Sen
Kamala Bai Sen
Narayan Lal Sen
Hearing History
Judge: HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY AHUJA
For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India
| Date | Purpose |
|---|---|
| 08-06-2026 | For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India |
Orders
The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple consolidated matters (Serial Nos. 902-925) because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, which is void ab initio under Supreme Court precedent. Consequently, all Commercial Execution Applications and related interim applications were dismissed. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded and allowed liberty to apply if express written agreements waiving ineligibility exist 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.
The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple consolidated matters (Serial Nos. 902-925) because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, which is void ab initio under Supreme Court precedent. Consequently, all Commercial Execution Applications and related interim applications were dismissed. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded and allowed liberty to apply if express written agreements waiving ineligibility exist 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.
Browse Related Cases
Cases under same legislation
Explore other courts