Judgment · High Court · 2026
Case at a glance
Outcome
Set aside
Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside
Provisions considered
Key paragraphs
- Para 22. Since in all these matters it has been found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral, in view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective…
Judgment
Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b GNP Legal for the Applicant in Sr. No. 926, 948 and 949. Ms. Bijal Gogri i/b O.M. Gujar Law Chambers for the Applicant in Sr. No.927,930,975 and 980. Mr. Suraj Gupta i/b SG Legal & Associates for the Applicant in Sr. No. 928,929,951,1014 to 1018,1022 to 1024,1027,1028,1039 and 1060. Ms. Reena Lange i/b PMH Law for the Applicant in Sr.no. 930. None present in other matters. CORAM DATE : : ABHAY AHUJA, J. 22nd April 2026 PC:-
#1. All these matters have been listed in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhadra International (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Others vs. Airports Authority of India1 where the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that unilateral appointment of arbitrator is void ab initio and the ineligibility can be raised at any stage and even in execution.
#2. Since in all these matters it has been found by the office of the Prothonotary & Senior Master of this Court that the appointment of the sole arbitrator has been unilateral, in view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside and the Commercial Execution Applications / Execution Applications, 1 2026 SCC Online SC 7 Nikita Gadgil 1/2 NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL Digitally signed by NIKITA YOGESH GADGIL 19:39:20 +0530 901 to 975 and 977 to 1155.doc and the connected Interim Applications as well as the Chamber Summons, if any, stand accordingly dismissed / disposed.
#3. It would be open to the parties to initiate fresh arbitration proceedings in accordance with law.
#4. As far as limitation is concerned, the period from the invocation of the arbitration till today be excluded in initiating fresh arbitration proceedings.
#5. Liberty to apply in the event there exists an express agreement in writing in terms of proviso to Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (the “said Act”) waiving the ineligibility of the sole arbitrator or the right to object under Section 12(5) of the said Act. (ABHAY AHUJA, J.) Nikita Gadgil 2/2
Questions this judgment answers
What did the Court decide in this case?
The Court recorded the following disposition: Hon'ble Supreme Court, the respective arbitral awards stand set aside
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — s. 12(5).
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 22 Apr 2026. The bench was ABHAY AHUJA.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No treatment data yet for this judgment in the Courts & Cases corpus.
Absence of data is not a statement about the judgment’s standing — the corpus covers only judgments we index and link with cited evidence.