INTEGRO FINSERV PRIAVATE LIMITED S. I. JOSHI and CO. vs IRSHAD AHMED AND ANR — EXA/1648/2015

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2). Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 11th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020156392015

Filing Number

EXA/1231/2015

Filing Date

09-Jun-2015

Registration No

EXA/1648/2015

Registration Date

05-Aug-2015

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

11-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 12-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.INTEGRO FINSERV PRIAVATE LIMITED S. I. JOSHI and CO.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.IRSHAD AHMED AND ANR

  2. 2.IQBAL AHMED

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 11-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF

    The High Court of Bombay set aside the arbitral award in Integro Finserv's execution application against Irshad Ahmed, finding that the sole arbitrator's appointment was unilateral and void ab initio, following Supreme Court precedent in Bhadra International. The court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration with the prior limitation period excluded from the fresh proceedings timeline. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 11-Jun-2026

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

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

  4. 09-Jun-2015

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/1648/2015

casestatus.in Summary

The High Court of Bombay set aside the arbitral award in Integro Finserv's execution application against Irshad Ahmed, finding that the sole arbitrator's appointment was unilateral and void ab initio, following Supreme Court precedent in Bhadra International. The court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, permitting parties to initiate fresh arbitration with the prior limitation period excluded from the fresh proceedings timeline. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case