VISAGE HOLDINGS AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED vs M A GARMENTS AND 2 ORS — EXA/67/2023

Case under Code of Civil Procedure Section 11 (2). Disposed: Contested--DISMISSED on 09th April 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM020319562021

Filing Number

EXA/31871/2021

Filing Date

31-Dec-2021

Registration No

EXA/67/2023

Registration Date

20-Jan-2023

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

09-Apr-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISMISSED

Last updated 10-May-2026

Acts & Sections

Code of Civil Procedure Section 11 (2)

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.VISAGE HOLDINGS AND FINANCE PRIVATE LIMITED

    Adv. Mangesh Subhash Puri,Padmakar S Garad,Padmakar S Garad, ,Padmakar S Garad

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.M A GARMENTS AND 2 ORS

  2. 2.ALTAF HUSSAIN

  3. 3.SAKINA BANO ALTAF HUSAIN

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 09-Apr-2026

    Hon'ble Shri Justice Abhay AhujaView PDF

    The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's decision in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, unless there exists a written agreement waiving the ineligibility 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.

  3. 09-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. 31-Dec-2021

    Case filed

    Registration No. EXA/67/2023

casestatus.in Summary

The Bombay High Court dismissed multiple applications and set aside arbitral awards where the sole arbitrator was unilaterally appointed, following the Supreme Court's decision in *Bhadra International* that such appointments are void ab initio. The court allowed parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings with the limitation period excluded, unless there exists a written agreement waiving the ineligibility 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

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case