CARS24 SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED vs TSISIA ENTREPRENEUR PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

Judgment text excerpt

$~O-2 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ARB.P. 382/2025 Date of Decision: 24.07.2025 CARS24 SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED .....Petitioner Through: Mr Rit Arora, Advocate. versus TSISIA ENTREPRENEUR PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Mr Danish Syed, Advocate for R1 to R4. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV JUDGEMENT PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents raised two objections: (i) that this Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the instant application, and (ii) that the earlier arbitration agreement no longer exists in view of the subsequent settlement reached between the parties. 2. In response to the said objections, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that Clause 8.1 of the Agreement dated 17.01.2019 unequivocally confers jurisdiction upon this Court. As regards the purported settlement agreement between the parties, learned counsel contended that the said agreement has not been fully acted upon. He further submitted that there are several deficiencies, including non-payment of stamp duty, Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified Signed By:AMIT KUMAR Signed SHARMA Signing Date:11.08.2025ARB.P. 382/2025 By:PURUSHAINDRA Page 1 of 7 12:51:52 KUMAR KAURAV associated with the subsequent agreement. He also argued that the dispute arises out of the original agreement, which has not been expressly rescinded by the later agreement. Accordingly, it was submitted that this Court may consider appointing an arbitrator. 3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and have perused the record. Clause 8.1 of the agreement dated 17.01.2019 reads as under: “8.1 Dispute Resolution. In case of any difference(s) and/or dispute(s) arising