AUSTIN HYUNDAI (AUSTIN DISTRIBUTORS PVT LTD) vs AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS INDIA PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 09.04.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 18.04.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 18.04.2026 + FAO (COMM) 98/2026 AUSTIN HYUNDAI (AUSTIN DISTRIBUTORS PVT LTD) .....Appellant Through: Mr. Samrat Nigam, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Archana Sonthalia, Ms. Prachi Pratap, Dr. Prashant Pratap, Mr. Amjid Maqbool, Ms. Anupriya Dixit, and Ms. Pallavi Pratap, Advs. versus AXALTA COATING SYSTEMS INDIA PVT LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Piyush Sharma and Mr. Armaan Verma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.: 1. Through the present Appeal preferred under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 19961 [hereinafter referred to as the „A&C Act‟], the Appellant assails the order dated 18.03.2026 [hereinafter referred to as the „Impugned Order‟] passed by the learned District Judge whereby the petition filed by the Appellant under Section 34 of the A&C Act2 [hereinafter referred to as „Section 34 Petition‟] seeking setting aside of the arbitral award dated 13.09.2024 [hereinafter referred to as the „Award‟] came to be 1 Section 37 2 Section 34 Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:18.04.2026FAO (COMM) 98/2026 Page 1 of 15 11:27:41 dismissed. 2. By virtue of the Impugned Order, the learned District Judge declined to interfere with the findings returned by the learned Sole Arbitrator, who had allowed the claims of the Respondent arising out of a Supply Agreement dated 19.07.2019 [hereinafter referred to as „Supply Agreement‟] and held the Appellant liable towards repayment of the amount treated as upfront investment support along with allied claims. 3. The principal question which therefore arises for consideration before this Court is whet