NEOGROWTH CREDIT PVT LTD vs SANJEEVINI FILLING STATION AND 2 ORS — EXA/181/2026

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--WITHDRAWN on 09th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020149532022

Filing Number

EXA/14949/2022

Filing Date

05-May-2022

Registration No

EXA/181/2026

Registration Date

09-Feb-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe , National Lok Adalat

Coram

Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe , National Lok Adalat

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

09-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--WITHDRAWN

Last updated 21-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.NEOGROWTH CREDIT PVT LTD

    Adv. GNP Legal

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SANJEEVINI FILLING STATION AND 2 ORS

  2. 2.YERRAGOLLA ANJANEYULU

  3. 3.KIRAN KUMAR YADAV

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-May-2026

    Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe,national Lok AdalatView PDF

    Case Summary: EXA/181/2026 The Bombay High Court allowed Neo Growth Credit Private Limited's withdrawal of execution proceedings and set aside the underlying arbitral award as void-ab-initio because the arbitrator's appointment was unilateral. Following recent Supreme Court precedent, the court held that arbitral awards can be invalidated at the execution stage on this ground and permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-May-2026

    For Direction

    Hon'ble Ms Justice Aarti A. Sathe , National Lok Adalat

  4. 05-May-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/181/2026

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: EXA/181/2026 The Bombay High Court allowed Neo Growth Credit Private Limited's withdrawal of execution proceedings and set aside the underlying arbitral award as void-ab-initio because the arbitrator's appointment was unilateral. Following recent Supreme Court precedent, the court held that arbitral awards can be invalidated at the execution stage on this ground and permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case