KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LTD. vs RUSTAM HAJIMALANG SAVALE — EXA/2844/2024

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

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020163672022

Filing Number

EXA/16363/2022

Filing Date

23-May-2022

Registration No

EXA/2844/2024

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 LTD.

    Adv. Sandeep D Rankhambe,SANTOSH JAWALE,SANTOSH JAWALE, SANTOSH JAWALE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.RUSTAM HAJIMALANG SAVALE

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards in all 268 consolidated cases, finding that the sole arbitrators were appointed unilaterally in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, following the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, except where written agreements waive the ineligibility objection under Section 12(5) of the Act. 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. 23-May-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/2844/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards in all 268 consolidated cases, finding that the sole arbitrators were appointed unilaterally in violation of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, following the Supreme Court's ruling in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, except where written agreements waive the ineligibility objection under Section 12(5) of the Act. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case