ANKHIM HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. & ANR. versus ZAVERI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.

ANKHIM HOLDINGS PVT. LTD. & ANR. versus ZAVERI CONSTRUCTION PVT. LTD.

The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by declaring the arbitral proceedings held between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 to be a nullity on account of the moratorium under Section 14 IBC; instead the proper course was to appoint a substitute arbitrator...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Ankhim Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.; Respondent: Zaveri Construction Pvt. Ltd.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
04 February 2026
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Bombay High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed in part; part of the High Court judgment declaring proceedings between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 nullity set aside and impugned judgment modified
Legal Topics
Substitute Arbitrator, Moratorium Under Section 14 IBC, Nullity of Proceedings, Section 15(2) Arbitration Act, Minimal Judicial Intervention, Third Party Rights, Section 11 Jurisdiction
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Constitution of India Substitute Arbitrator Moratorium Under Section 14 IBC Nullity of Proceedings Section 15(2) Arbitration Act Minimal Judicial Intervention +2 more

Source-derived case record

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 5 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ankhim Holdings Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Appellant

Zaveri Construction Pvt. Ltd.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Judgment on Appeal From Bombay High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether proceedings held between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 are nullity because they were undertaken during moratorium under Section 14 IBC
  2. 2 Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by declaring arbitral proceedings nullity instead of appointing a substitute arbitrator
  3. 3 Whether orders/rulings of an arbitral tribunal prior to substitution are invalidated by change in tribunal composition and the scope of Section 15(3)-(4)

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court exceeded its jurisdiction under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 by declaring the arbitral proceedings held between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 to be a nullity on account of the moratorium under Section 14 IBC; instead the proper course was to appoint a substitute arbitrator who would continue the proceedings and prior orders of the tribunal are not rendered invalid solely by change in composition under Section 15(4); accordingly the part of the High Court order declaring those proceedings nullity was set aside and transactions were declared valid under Article 142 to protect third-party rights.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed in part; part of the High Court judgment declaring proceedings between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 nullity set aside and impugned judgment modified

Orders

  • Part of the impugned High Court order declaring arbitral proceedings held between 17.03.2022 and 25.08.2022 to be a nullity is set aside
  • Transactions (sales) effected pursuant to the Arbitral Tribunal orders are declared lawfully valid in exercise of Article 142 of the Constitution of India to protect third-party rights