$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Judgment reserved on:08.01.2026 Judgment pronounced on: 28.01.2026 + EX.P. 386/2015, EX.APPL.(OS) 233/2017 (U/O XXI RULE

46), EX.APPL.(OS) 337/2017 (U/O XXI Rule 58), EX.APPL. (OS) 339/2017 (U/O XXI Rule 46A), EX.APPL.(OS) 423/2018 (U/O 21 Rule 64 & Rule 72), EX.APPL.(OS) 1522/2025 (U/O XXI Rule 58) & EX.APPL.(OS) 1794/2025 (Delay of 4 Days in filing the rejoinder)

AVNEET SONI .....Decree Holder Through: Mr. Pawanjit Singh Bindra, Senior Advocate with Mr. Kirtiman Singh, Mr. Madhu Sudan, Mr. Vikhyat Oberoi, Mr. Ankit Kakkar, Mr. Ravi Sharma, Mr. Nishita Gupta, Mr. Shivam Prakash, Ms. Shreya V. Mehra, Mr. Fazal Haroon, Ms. Deepti Mehra and Mr. Maulik, Advocates.

versus KAVITA AGARWAL .....Judgement Debtor Through: Mr. Arvind Nigam, Senior Advocate with Mr. Raghuveer Kapur and Mr. Sagar Aggarwal, Advocates. CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR

J U D G M E N T

Signature Not Verified HARISH VAIDYANATHAN SHANKAR, J.

Prologue:

1. The present Execution Petition, being EX.P. 386/2015, has been filed by the Decree Holder under Section 36 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, The A&C Act, read with Order XXI and Sections 94 and 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, CPC seeking enforcement of the Arbitral Award dated 31.12.2014, passed by the learned Sole Arbitrator, Justice K.S. Gupta (Retd.).

2. By the said Award, the Decree Holder was granted a sum of Rs. 4.80 Cr., along with interest thereon at the rate of 6% per annum from 01.02.2013 until realisation. In addition thereto, the Judgment Debtor was directed to pay an amount of Rs. 1,92,000/- towards arbitration fees and miscellaneous expenses, as well as Rs. 35,000/- towards the Decree Holder‟s legal fees.

3. In the course of the execution proceedings, the Judgment Debtor has filed an application, being EX.APPL.(OS) 1522/2025, under Section 47 read with Order XXI Rule 58 and Section 151 of the CPC, Objection Application, seeking dismissal of the Execution Petition. By way of the said application, the Judgment Debtor prays for a declaration that the Arbitral Award dated 31.12.2014 is null and void, non est in law, and incapable of execution.

4. This Court has heard learned senior counsel for the parties at length on the aforesaid Objection Application. Pursuant thereto, the present judgment is being rendered, which shall conclusively determine the maintainability of the Execution Petition. It is evident Signature Not Verified that in the event the Objection Application succeeds, the Execution Petition would necessarily fail.

EX.APPL.(OS) 1794/2025 (Condonation of Delay of 4 Days in Filing the Rejoinder)

5. Before proceeding to adjudicate the objections raised to the Execution Petition, it is necessary to consider EX.APPL.(OS) 1794/2025, whereby the Judgment Debtor seeks condonation of a delay of four days in filing the rejoinder to the reply filed in the Objection Application.

6. Having regard to the grounds stated in the application and considering that the delay is minimal in nature, this Court is satisfied that sufficient cause has been shown. Accordingly, the delay of four days in filing the rejoinder is condoned, and EX.APPL.(OS)

1794/2025 is allowed and disposed of.

EX.APPL.(OS) 1522/2025 (Under Order XXI Rule 58 CPC)

7. The Court now proceeds to examine EX.APPL.(OS) 1522/2025, the Objection Application filed by the Judgment Debtor challenging the execution of the arbitral award, primarily on the ground that the learned Sole Arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to pass the Award and, consequently, that the decree arising therefrom is unsustainable in law. 8. For the sake of clarity and consistency in the present adjudication, the Judgment Debtor shall hereinafter be referred to as the “Objector”, and the Decree Holder shall be referred to as the “DH”

Brief Facts:

9. Shorn of unnecessary details, the facts essential for the Signature Not Verified adjudication of the present Objection Application are as follows:

(i) An Agreement to