GOYAL MG GASES PVT LTD vs CLASSIC MOTORS PVT LTD

Judgment text excerpt

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment reserved on: 25.02.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 12.05.2026 Judgment uploaded on: 12.05.2026 + FAO(OS)(COMM) 172/2020 GOYAL MG GASES PVT LTD ...Appellant Through: Mr. Simran Mehta, Mr. Prakash Chand and Mr. Archit Vashistha, Advs. versus CLASSIC MOTORS PVT LTD ....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Saxena and Ms. Padamja Sharma, Advs. + FAO(OS)(COMM) 23/2021 GOYAL MG GASES PVT LTD ...Appellant Through: Mr. Simran Mehta, Mr. Prakash Chand and Mr. Archit Vashistha, Advs. versus CLASSIC MOTORS PVT LTD ....Respondent Through: Mr. Rahul Saxena and Ms. Padamja Sharma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KSHETARPAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT MAHAJAN JUDGMENT ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.: 1. Through the present Appeals filed under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [hereinafter referred to as „Act of 1996‟], the Appellant (Respondent before the Tribunal/Licensee) assails the correctness of the common Judgment dated 20.03.2018 [hereinafter referred to as „Impugned Judgment‟] passed by the Single Signature Not Verified Signed By:JAI NARAYAN Signing Date:12.05.2026 FAO(OS)(COMM) 172/2020 & connected matter Page 1 of 15 15:20:55 Bench (SB) of this Court, whereby the application filed by the Respondent (Claimant before the Tribunal/Licensor) under Section 34 of the Act of 1996, challenging the Arbitral Award (AA) dated 25.09.2014 along with the corrigendum dated 22.11.2014, came to be allowed, while dismissing the application filed by the Appellant. 2. For the sake of clarity, consistency and ease of reference, the parties in the present Appeal shall be referred to in accordance with their respective status before the Arbitral Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as „AT‟]. 3. Pithily put, the Respondent contends that the SB