M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA PRIME LTD. vs DUJODWALA PAPER CHEMICALS LTD. AND 2 ORS Advocate - AAGAM J DOSHI, RESP. NO. 3 — EXA/1309/2016
Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 08th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM020123302016
Filing Number
EXA/1173/2016
Filing Date
05-May-2016
Registration No
EXA/1309/2016
Registration Date
12-Jul-2016
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 20-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.M/S. KOTAK MAHINDRA PRIME LTD.
Adv. Vishal Tambat ,DECREE HOLDER/PETITIONER,DECREE HOLDER/PETITIONER, DECREE HOLDER/PETITIONER
Respondent(s)
-
1.DUJODWALA PAPER CHEMICALS LTD. AND 2 ORS Advocate - AAGAM J DOSHI, RESP. NO. 3
-
2.OMPRAKASH RAMGOPAL DUJODWALA
-
3.VINEET DUJODWALA
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
17-Jul-2026
Due Matters - Adjourned OS
Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay Ahuja
-
08-May-2026
The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple cases (Serial Nos. 912-1035) involving Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd. and others, finding that the sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration while excluding the prior arbitration period from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
08-May-2026
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
05-May-2016
Case filed
Registration No. EXA/1309/2016
The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple cases (Serial Nos. 912-1035) involving Kotak Mahindra Prime Ltd. and others, finding that the sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International precedent that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio, the court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration while excluding the prior arbitration period from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts