KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs S M TRADERS — EXA/2841/2024

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

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020163522023

Filing Number

EXA/16345/2023

Filing Date

17-Jun-2023

Registration No

EXA/2841/2024

Registration Date

23-Oct-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

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED

    Adv. ASHWIN S TRIPATHI

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.S M TRADERS

  2. 2.TARANNUM ASLAM SHAIKH

  3. 3.ASLAM MOHDMHINUDDIN SHAIKH

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed all applications and set aside arbitral awards where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the prior limitation period, though arbitrators waived in writing under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 may be retained. 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 Abhay Ahuja

  4. 17-Jun-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/2841/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed all applications and set aside arbitral awards where sole arbitrators were unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio and ineligibility can be raised at any stage. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the prior limitation period, though arbitrators waived in writing under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 may be retained. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case