FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED vs PATEL TRADING AND ORS — EXA/1267/2025
Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 04th May 2026.
CNR: HCBM020180162024
Filing Number
EXA/18010/2024
Filing Date
13-Jun-2024
Registration No
EXA/1267/2025
Registration Date
14-Jul-2025
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
04-May-2026
Nature of Disposal
Contested--DISMISSED
Last updated 21-Jun-2026
Acts & Sections
Petitioner(s)
-
1.FEDBANK FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED
Adv. Advocate- ,Divekar and Co,ASAP LEGAL
Respondent(s)
-
1.PATEL TRADING AND ORS
-
2.BHAGARAM RAMARAM PATEL
-
3.SEEMA BHAGARAM PATEL
Case History
-
Case disposedDisposed
-
04-May-2026
The Bombay High Court set aside all arbitral awards in multiple consolidated cases (Serial Nos. 902-1151) involving FedBank Financial Services Limited and Patel Trading, finding that the sole arbitrator's appointment was unilateral and void ab initio under Supreme Court precedent. The court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, allowing parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, except where parties had executed written agreements waiving objections under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
-
04-May-2026
For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India
Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay Ahuja
-
07-May-2025
Shri. A. H. Laddhad(Prothonotary Senior Master)View PDF
-
07-May-2025
First hearing
Initial hearing scheduled
-
13-Jun-2024
Case filed
Registration No. EXA/1267/2025
The Bombay High Court set aside all arbitral awards in multiple consolidated cases (Serial Nos. 902-1151) involving FedBank Financial Services Limited and Patel Trading, finding that the sole arbitrator's appointment was unilateral and void ab initio under Supreme Court precedent. The court dismissed all related execution and interim applications, allowing parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior limitation period excluded, except where parties had executed written agreements waiving objections under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.
Explore other courts