Mahadev Amrut Mane vs M/s. IndusInd Bank Limited Solapur Through Its Legal Exe. Shridhar S. Rahul Advocate - Raool Shridhar Sambmurti — 181/2025

Case under Limitation Act Section 5. Disposed: Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING on 13th March 2026.

Civil M.A. - Civil Misc. Application

CNR: MHSO010021172025

Case disposed

e-Filing Number

02-07-2025

Filing Number

757/2025

Filing Date

03-07-2025

Registration No

181/2025

Registration Date

07-07-2025

Court

District and Session Court , Solapur

Judge

1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

Decision Date

13th March 2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--ALLOWED / GRANTED AFTER FULL HEARING

Acts & Sections

Limitation Act Section 5

Petitioner(s)

Mahadev Amrut Mane

Adv. Kanaki A. S.

Shivala Mahadev Mane

Adv. Kanaki A. S.

Respondent(s)

M/s. IndusInd Bank Limited Solapur Through Its Legal Exe. Shridhar S. Rahul Advocate - Raool Shridhar Sambmurti

Hearing History

Judge: 1-Principal District and Sessions Judge

13-03-2026

Disposed

12-03-2026

Order

05-03-2026

Order

26-02-2026

Order

20-02-2026

Order

Final Orders / Judgements

13-03-2026
Order on Exhibit

The Principal District Judge, Solapur allowed the applicants' plea to condone a 4-year, 3-month delay in filing an application against an arbitral award dated April 12, 2021. The court found that the applicants were genuinely unaware of the arbitration proceedings because notice was never properly served—postal notices addressed to the applicants were marked "address incomplete" and returned. The arbitration proceeded ex parte without any alternative service method (such as newspaper publication) being attempted. The court held that the cause of delay (lack of notice) rather than its duration justified condonation, entitling the applicants to challenge the award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

casestatus.in Summary

The Principal District Judge, Solapur allowed the applicants' plea to condone a 4-year, 3-month delay in filing an application against an arbitral award dated April 12, 2021. The court found that the applicants were genuinely unaware of the arbitration proceedings because notice was never properly served—postal notices addressed to the applicants were marked "address incomplete" and returned. The arbitration proceeded ex parte without any alternative service method (such as newspaper publication) being attempted. The court held that the cause of delay (lack of notice) rather than its duration justified condonation, entitling the applicants to challenge the award under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Browse Related Cases

Cases under same legislation

More from this court

District and Session Court , Solapur All courts →

Explore other courts

Search Another Case