Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
RAJESH S. PATIL
L&T Finance Ltd. (Formerly Known As L&T Housing Finance Ltd.) – Appellant
Versus
Sangeeta Bhansali (Borrower) – Respondent
Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points summarized with appropriate references:
Please let me know if you require a more detailed analysis or specific legal advice related to this case.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. dispute arises from loan agreements. (Para 1) |
| 2. applications challenging sole arbitrator's appointment were rejected. (Para 2 , 3 , 6) |
| 3. judgment debtor did not challenge the award. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. supreme court rules on unilateral appointment of arbitrator. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 5. decrees without jurisdiction are null and can be challenged at any stage. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 6. similar cases affirm that unilateral appointments render awards void. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 7. court concurs with previous rulings on void awards. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 8. court sets aside award; parties may initiate fresh arbitration. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH S. PATIL, J.
1. The dispute between the parties is arising out of Loan Agreements. The Respondent no. 1 is Borrower who had approached and applied for mortgaged loan facilities from the Applicant-claimant. The Respondent no. 2 is the Co–Borrower for the loan advanced to the Respondent no. 1. Since the dispute arose between the parties under the said agreement, the claimant invoked Arbitration Clause, hence the lender – L & T Finance, appointment Sole Arbitrator, and the matter was referred to Arbitration.
2. Before the Sole Arbitrator,
Unilateral appointment of a sole arbitrator violates equal treatment principles and renders the award void ab initio under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Arbitral award will be vitiated where appointment of Sole Arbitrator is unilateral.
A unilateral appointment of an arbitrator by a party interested in the dispute is null and void under Section 12(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended in 2015.
An arbitral award resulting from a unilaterally appointed Arbitrator is void for lack of inherent jurisdiction, allowing the executing court to refuse enforcement.
The unilateral appointment of an arbitrator does not render an arbitral award a nullity unless formally challenged; such challenges are to be made under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation....
Unilateral arbitrator appointment causes de jure ineligibility under Section 12(5); participation without objection does not waive rights, requiring express written agreement; challenge valid under S....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
