In all honesty I wouldn’t call this a “defeat” by any metric. While Pakistan’s air force is generally regarded as having performed better than expected during the recent clashes, neither side could effectively control the air space or even really contest the other’s air space for any significant time. The main advantage Pakistan has seems to be a doctrinal one. They appear to put greater emphasis on aerial radar and long range reconnaissance. With the age of flight by sight and dogfighting long over, the Indian approach will need amendment. India seems to currently be converting several former civilian A321s for military use in order to equip them either with the Israeli made Radar system they already employ on their dated IL-76s or with a domestic radar system, that we can’t yet evaluate. When that capability is online the IAF should be able to bring its numbers advantage to bear more easily.

“Defeated” might be overstating it, but Pakistan generally overperformed compared to expectations with a smaller airforce, as they have a significant advantage in AWACS capabilities (Saab 340, I think?), whereas India is more limited, in the form of a few IL76 and some homebrewed systems in the works.

In this age of BVR capabilities and standoff munitions, airborne radar and intelligence is key to operational success, and Pakistan knows this, whereas India has taken more of a brute force approach to modern aerial warfare, something that was obsolete 40 years ago, if not before.

I don’t think anybody had air superiority in that conflict, but Pakistan was more effective in standoff strikes than India anticipated. Defeated implies that Pakistan could’ve run sorties into Indian territory and that really was not the case. And if it was the case, the likelihood of it suddenly going nuclear was high because it threatens second strike capability.