KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED vs RAJENDRA RAMDULAR GUPTA TRANSPORT — EXA/1731/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 15th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020164042023

Filing Number

EXA/16397/2023

Filing Date

17-Jun-2023

Registration No

EXA/1731/2024

Registration Date

21-Jun-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

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 25-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.RAJENDRA RAMDULAR GUPTA TRANSPORT

  2. 2.SANJAY REJENDRA GUPTA

  3. 3.GANESH RAJENDRA GUPTA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside all arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's landmark decision in *Bhadra International* that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the period already spent excluded from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-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/1731/2024

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside all arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's landmark decision in *Bhadra International* that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the period already spent excluded from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case