Supreme Court Refuses To Interfere With ₹66.31 Lakh Award In Favour Of Aakash In Coaching Franchise Dispute
Kirit Singhania
28 April 2026 11:57 AM IST
The Supreme Court of India on Tuesday dismissed a plea by Paramount Learning Solutions in a franchise dispute involving an Aakash Educational Services Ltd. coaching centre.
It declined to interfere with the Delhi High Court's judgment of August 7, 2025, which had upheld an arbitral award in favour of Aakash.
A Bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe declined to interfere with the High Court's ruling. The High Court had affirmed an arbitral award relating to the operation of an Aakash coaching centre at Pathankot. It directed Paramount Learning Solutions to pay about Rs. 66.31 lakh to Aakash.
Appearing for Paramount Learning Solutions, counsel contended that the arbitral award was contrary to the terms of the 2016 franchise agreement and suffered from patent illegality. It was argued that the award ignored the contractual framework between the parties and granted monetary reliefs contrary to the contractual scheme.
However, the bench was not inclined to interfere with the High Court's order. It dismissed the petition.
Background
The dispute arose from a franchise agreement dated June 30, 2016 between Aakash Educational Services Limited and its franchisee, Paramount Learning Solutions, for running a coaching centre at Pathankot. Under the agreement, the franchisee was required to share revenue and comply with contractual obligations.
Disputes emerged when the franchisee allegedly defaulted in payments, failed to clear dues, and issues arose regarding stoppage of services and closure of the centre in May 2020. The company thereafter terminated the agreement on May 11, 2020 invoking contractual provisions.
Arbitration proceedings commenced on June 29, 2020, leading to an award dated February 9, 2023 (corrected on March 6, 2023), wherein the arbitrator upheld the termination and allowed monetary claims in favour of Aakash. A challenge under Section 34 was dismissed by the Commercial Court on April 19, 2024.
On further appeal, the Delhi High Court affirmed the award, reiterating the limited scope of interference and holding that “the court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award,” thereby refusing to interfere with the arbitral findings.