HINDUJA LEYLAND FINANCE LTD. vs DHIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND ANR. — EXA/2220/2015

Case under Code of Civil Procedure. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 17th June 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020258412015

Filing Number

EXA/1909/2015

Filing Date

15-Sep-2015

Registration No

EXA/2220/2015

Registration Date

27-Oct-2015

Judge

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Coram

Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

Bench Type

Single

Category

PERSONAL LAW ( 31 )

Judicial Branch

Original

Decision Date

17-Jun-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 18-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.HINDUJA LEYLAND FINANCE LTD.

    Adv. KB and Co.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.DHIRENDRA KUMAR SINGH AND ANR.

  2. 2.RAKESH TIWARI S/O RAJENDRA TIWARI

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 17-Jun-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal JainView PDF

    Case Summary: EXA/2220/2015 - Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd. v. Dhirendra Kumar Singh & Anr. The Bombay High Court set aside the arbitral awards and dismissed the execution applications after finding that the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, rendering the appointment void ab initio. Following the Supreme Court's precedent in Bhadra International, the court held that such defects in arbitrator appointment can be challenged at any stage, including execution. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the prior limitation period from consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 17-Jun-2026

    For Dismissal in view of decision in Bhadra International Pvt. Ltd. V/s Airports Authority of India

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Jitendra Shantilal Jain

  4. 15-Sep-2015

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/2220/2015

casestatus.in Summary

Case Summary: EXA/2220/2015 - Hinduja Leyland Finance Ltd. v. Dhirendra Kumar Singh & Anr. The Bombay High Court set aside the arbitral awards and dismissed the execution applications after finding that the sole arbitrator was appointed unilaterally, rendering the appointment void ab initio. Following the Supreme Court's precedent in Bhadra International, the court held that such defects in arbitrator appointment can be challenged at any stage, including execution. The court permitted parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings, excluding the prior limitation period from consideration. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case