New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday reserved its verdict on a batch of petitions filed by future group Firm against the order of the Delhi High Court staying the decision of the Arbitration Tribunal refusing to interfere with the Emergency Award (EA) of the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC). A bench headed by Chief Justice NV Ramana said, “We reserve the order. All the four SLPs (Special Leave Petitions) are over. There is a lot of homework for us. Anyway, I will not write the lengthy judgment.”
Initially, the bench, which also included Justices AS Bopanna and Hema Kohli, suggested to the lawyers: heroine and the Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court of Future Group firms to be permitted to hear Future Group’s statutory appeals against the final arbitral award of the SIAC.
The bench said the petitions, which are arising out of the EA’s decision and are pending before it, “cannot be relevant now as the final decision of the SIAC has already been passed”.
“Your (Future Group) first SLP which has challenged the order of Justice JR Midha (Delhi HC), we had said that there is no implementation of that order. We have never asked the Delhi High Court to hear the matter. Said no, which came out later.” The Bench made the observation initially.
The top court is hearing petitions, including a fresh petition by Future Group against the recent order of the Delhi High Court, dismissing its plea to stay the arbitration tribunal’s decision refusing to interfere in the EA of SIAC. Which stopped it from going ahead with Rs 24,731 crore. Merger deal with Reliance Retail
SIAC in EA had given relief to US e-commerce major Amazon by preventing Future from going ahead with the Rs 24,731 crore merger deal of Future Retail Ltd (FRL) with Reliance Retail.
Amazon had dragged Future Group to arbitration in SIAC in October last year, arguing that FRL had breached their contract by making a deal with rival Reliance Retail.
On October 21 last year, a duly constituted panel of arbitrators in the SIAC reiterated the EA’s decision. On October 29, 2021, the Delhi High Court dismissed Future Group’s plea for a stay on the arbitration tribunal. The High Court sought a response from Amazon, which had challenged the merger before SIAC, and listed the appeals by FCPL and FRL for further hearing on January 4, 2022.
FRL and FCPL recently moved the apex court against the order with fresh arguments.
Kishor Biyani and 15 others including FRL and FCPL are embroiled in a series of lawsuits with Amazon, an investor in FCPL, over the deal with Reliance. After the EA, subsequently, a three-member arbitral tribunal was constituted to decide the issues arising out of the deal.
On September 9 last year, the apex court had stayed for four weeks all proceedings before the high court regarding the implementation of the EA and also statutory authorities such as the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Competition Commission of India (CCI). was instructed. And the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in the meantime will not pass any final order relating to the merger deal.
Thereafter, the arbitration tribunal under SIAC on October 21 last year dismissed the FRL’s plea for removal of the interim stay granted by its EA on October 25, 2020, observing that the “award was correctly was given”.
FRL and FCPL had moved the apex court against the High Court order dated August 17, 2021, which had held that it would be pursuant to the EA’s award, earlier by its single-judge restraining FRL from proceeding with the deal. will implement the order.
The High Court had said that in the absence of a stay, it would have to implement the order passed by its single judge Justice JR Midha on March 18, 2021.
On March 18, besides restraining FRL from proceeding on its deal with Reliance Retail, the court had imposed a cost of Rs 20 lakh on Future Group and others associated with it and ordered attachment of their properties.
On August 6 last year, the Supreme Court ruled in Amazon’s favor and held that the EA award, quashing the Rs 24,731 crore FRL-Reliance Retail merger deal, is valid and enforceable under Indian arbitration laws.
The top court had also set aside two orders of the division bench of the Delhi High Court order dated February 8 and March 22, 2021, which had quashed the single-judge orders that had stayed the FRL-RRL merger.
Since his retirement, a bench headed by Justice RF Nariman had dealt with the larger question and held that an award of an EA of a foreign country is enforceable under the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
Initially, the bench, which also included Justices AS Bopanna and Hema Kohli, suggested to the lawyers: heroine and the Single Judge Bench of the Delhi High Court of Future Group firms to be permitted to hear Future Group’s statutory appeals against the final arbitral award of the SIAC.
The bench said the petitions, which are arising out of the EA’s decision and are pending before it, “cannot be relevant now as the final decision of the SIAC has already been passed”.
“Your (Future Group) first SLP which has challenged the order of Justice JR Midha (Delhi HC), we had said that there is no implementation of that order. We have never asked the Delhi High Court to hear the matter. Said no, which came out later.” The Bench made the observation initially.
The top court is hearing petitions, including a fresh petition by Future Group against the recent order of the Delhi High Court, dismissing its plea to stay the arbitration tribunal’s decision refusing to interfere in the EA of SIAC. Which stopped it from going ahead with Rs 24,731 crore. Merger deal with Reliance Retail
SIAC in EA had given relief to US e-commerce major Amazon by preventing Future from going ahead with the Rs 24,731 crore merger deal of Future Retail Ltd (FRL) with Reliance Retail.
Amazon had dragged Future Group to arbitration in SIAC in October last year, arguing that FRL had breached their contract by making a deal with rival Reliance Retail.
On October 21 last year, a duly constituted panel of arbitrators in the SIAC reiterated the EA’s decision. On October 29, 2021, the Delhi High Court dismissed Future Group’s plea for a stay on the arbitration tribunal. The High Court sought a response from Amazon, which had challenged the merger before SIAC, and listed the appeals by FCPL and FRL for further hearing on January 4, 2022.
FRL and FCPL recently moved the apex court against the order with fresh arguments.
Kishor Biyani and 15 others including FRL and FCPL are embroiled in a series of lawsuits with Amazon, an investor in FCPL, over the deal with Reliance. After the EA, subsequently, a three-member arbitral tribunal was constituted to decide the issues arising out of the deal.
On September 9 last year, the apex court had stayed for four weeks all proceedings before the high court regarding the implementation of the EA and also statutory authorities such as the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Competition Commission of India (CCI). was instructed. And the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) in the meantime will not pass any final order relating to the merger deal.
Thereafter, the arbitration tribunal under SIAC on October 21 last year dismissed the FRL’s plea for removal of the interim stay granted by its EA on October 25, 2020, observing that the “award was correctly was given”.
FRL and FCPL had moved the apex court against the High Court order dated August 17, 2021, which had held that it would be pursuant to the EA’s award, earlier by its single-judge restraining FRL from proceeding with the deal. will implement the order.
The High Court had said that in the absence of a stay, it would have to implement the order passed by its single judge Justice JR Midha on March 18, 2021.
On March 18, besides restraining FRL from proceeding on its deal with Reliance Retail, the court had imposed a cost of Rs 20 lakh on Future Group and others associated with it and ordered attachment of their properties.
On August 6 last year, the Supreme Court ruled in Amazon’s favor and held that the EA award, quashing the Rs 24,731 crore FRL-Reliance Retail merger deal, is valid and enforceable under Indian arbitration laws.
The top court had also set aside two orders of the division bench of the Delhi High Court order dated February 8 and March 22, 2021, which had quashed the single-judge orders that had stayed the FRL-RRL merger.
Since his retirement, a bench headed by Justice RF Nariman had dealt with the larger question and held that an award of an EA of a foreign country is enforceable under the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act.
,