SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED AMOL B SHINDE vs DHARMENDRA KESHAV PRASAD GUPTA — EXA/513/2024

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 17th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020222472023

Filing Number

EXA/22238/2023

Filing Date

11-Aug-2023

Registration No

EXA/513/2024

Registration Date

21-Feb-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

17-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 27-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section Rule 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.SHRIRAM FINANCE LIMITED AMOL B SHINDE

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DHARMENDRA KESHAV PRASAD GUPTA

  2. 2.VIJAY RAMPRASAD YADAV

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple cases (Serial Nos. 901-942, 944-1132, 1138, 1141, 1145) following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International ruling that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court found the sole arbitrator appointments in these matters were unilateral and accordingly dismissed execution applications and interim applications. The parties are permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior arbitration period excluded from limitation calculations. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-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. 11-Aug-2023

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/513/2024

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court set aside arbitral awards in multiple cases (Serial Nos. 901-942, 944-1132, 1138, 1141, 1145) following the Supreme Court's Bhadra International ruling that unilateral arbitrator appointments are void ab initio. The court found the sole arbitrator appointments in these matters were unilateral and accordingly dismissed execution applications and interim applications. The parties are permitted to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the prior arbitration period 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