ASHV FINANCE LIMITED vs MITESH MOTILAL PARMAR AND ANR — EXA/1167/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2). Disposed: Uncontested--DISMISSED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020155482022

Filing Number

EXA/15544/2022

Filing Date

10-May-2022

Registration No

EXA/1167/2023

Registration Date

03-Aug-2023

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Uncontested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.ASHV FINANCE LIMITED

    Adv. rhshetty

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.MITESH MOTILAL PARMAR AND ANR

  2. 2.MITESH MOTILAL PARMAR

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Firdosh Phiroze PooniwallaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed ASHV Finance Ltd.'s execution application and set aside the arbitral award because the sole arbitrator's appointment was found to be unilateral, which is void ab initio under the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International. The court allowed the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, and permitted them to waive the ineligibility objection only through express written agreement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 09-Apr-2026

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

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Firdosh Phiroze Pooniwalla

  4. 10-May-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/1167/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed ASHV Finance Ltd.'s execution application and set aside the arbitral award because the sole arbitrator's appointment was found to be unilateral, which is void ab initio under the Supreme Court's decision in Bhadra International. The court allowed the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, and permitted them to waive the ineligibility objection only through express written agreement. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case