BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED ACUMEN LAWYERS FIRM vs SHRAVANI FRESH AND ANR. — EXA/1547/2022

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

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020210622022

Filing Number

EXA/21056/2022

Filing Date

02-Jul-2022

Registration No

EXA/1547/2022

Registration Date

17-Oct-2022

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

Bench Type

Single

Category

EXECUTION ( 15 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

15-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 25-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11(2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.BAJAJ FINANCE LIMITED ACUMEN LAWYERS FIRM

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.SHRAVANI FRESH AND ANR.

  2. 2.PRAMOD TRIPATHI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 15-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. PatilView PDF

    Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed Bajaj Finance Ltd.'s execution application against Shravani Fresh, declaring the arbitral award void-ab-initio because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally. Relying on a Supreme Court judgment from January 5, 2026, the court held that defective arbitrator appointment renders an award non-executable even at the execution stage, and permitted the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 15-Apr-2026

    For Dismissal Under Rule 329

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Rajesh S. Patil

  4. 02-Jul-2022

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/1547/2022

casestatus.in Summary

Summary The Bombay High Court dismissed Bajaj Finance Ltd.'s execution application against Shravani Fresh, declaring the arbitral award void-ab-initio because the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally. Relying on a Supreme Court judgment from January 5, 2026, the court held that defective arbitrator appointment renders an award non-executable even at the execution stage, and permitted the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case