MS DURGA AGRO SEEDS FARM vs MS NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~5 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of Decision: 22.04.2026 + FAO (COMM) 173/2023 MS DURGA AGRO SEEDS FARM .....Appellant Through: Mr. Shekhar G Devasa, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Manish Tiwari and Mr. Thashmitha Muthanna, Advs. versus MS NATIONAL SEEDS CORPORATION LTD .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yashvardhan, Mr. Gyanendra Shukla, Mr. Pranav Das and Mr. Shubhang Shukla, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J. (ORAL) 1. This appeal has been filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [the ‘Act of 1996’], read with Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act 2015, against the judgment dated 06.03.2023 passed by the District Judge Commercial Court, Saket in, OMP(COMM) No. 101/2019 [‘impugned judgment’] dismissing the Section 34 petition. 2. Brief facts relevant for deciding the appeal are as follows: - 2.1. The Respondent had authorized the Appellant to sell seeds to the Signature Not Verified FAO(COMM) 173/2023 Page 1 of 12 Signed By:HEMANT PRATAP SINGH Signing Date:02.05.2026 17:14 farmers in different notified districts of the state of Uttar Pradesh vide distribution agreement dated 17.02.2011 [‘distribution agreement’]. 2.2. The background1 of the distribution agreement is that the Uttar Pradesh Government had floated various subsidy schemes, such as a scheme for popularization of cultivation of hybrid paddy in the State of Uttar Pradesh. Under these schemes, the seeds were to be supplied to the farmer, where 50% of the ‘cost’ of seed was to come from the farmers, which [‘cost’] was to be received by the Respondent herein through the dealer [i.e., the Appellant] and the remaining 50% cost of seed, was the subsidy component, which was to be paid for by th