SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED (FORMELY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD) vs SANTOSH PARMESHWAR KAMTI — EXA/3169/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020134622024

Filing Number

EXA/13456/2024

Filing Date

18-Apr-2024

Registration No

EXA/3169/2024

Registration Date

11-Nov-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

Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED (FORMELY KNOWN AS SHRIRAM TRANSPORT FINANCE COMPANY LTD)

    Adv. adv amol shinde

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANTOSH PARMESHWAR KAMTI

  2. 2.ANAND SURESH LOKHANDE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple arbitration applications (Serial Nos. 901, 903, 904, 916-1148) after finding that the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, following the Supreme Court's precedent in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void *ab initio*. All related arbitral awards were set aside, and the court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings while excluding the time period from the original invocation from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 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

  4. 18-Apr-2024

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/3169/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple arbitration applications (Serial Nos. 901, 903, 904, 916-1148) after finding that the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, following the Supreme Court's precedent in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void *ab initio*. All related arbitral awards were set aside, and the court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings while excluding the time period from the original invocation 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