The Supreme Court on Monday put a stay on the ongoing proceedings related to the m💛erger of the Future Retail Ltd (FRL) with Reliance Retail case in Dehi High Court.
A bench of Justices𓄧 R F Nariman, B R Gavai and Hrishikesh Roy had posted the matter for hearing on May 4 and directed that all pleadings have been completed🥂 in the matter.
Amazon had ꦛmoved the apex court on April 8 challenging the Delhi High Court's division bench order that had vacated a stay on Kishore Biyani-led Future Grou🤪p proceeding with its Rs 24,713 crore asset sale to Reliance Industries.
Prior to this, FRL had moved the division bench of the high court against its a single judge's order upholding the Singapore's Emergency Arbitrator's (EA) order restraining FRL from going ahead with its Rs 24,713 crore deal with Relianꩲce Retail to sell its business.
The division bench had granted Future a reprieve from a March 1♍8 single-judge order that restrained it from taking any steps to sell assets to Relia🤪nce.
The petition by the US based e-commerce g𒁏iant has sought a stay on the March 22 order of the division bench, terming it "illegal&qꦉuot;, "random", "inequitable and unfair".
Amazon and Future have been locked in a bitter legal tussle after the US f🍸irm dragged Future Group to arbitration at SIAC in October last year, arguing that the latter had violated their contract by entering into the deal with rival Reliance.
Amazon had i𓃲nvested in Future Coupons in August 2019 with an option of buying into the flagship Future Retail after a period of three to 10 years.
The Future group had however moved the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) seeking regul♍atory approvals to the Rs 24,713 crore deal with Reliance.
Amazon had filed a plea before the high court (single judge) for enforcement of the October 25, 2020 Emergeꦇncy Arbitrator (EA) award by Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) restraining FRL from going ahead with its Rs 24,713 crore deal with Reliance Retail.
The high court division bench however said that it was staying the single judge order as FRL was not a party to the share subscription agreement (SSA) between Amazon and Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) and the US e-commerce giant wa🌜s not a party to the deal between FRL and Reliance Retail.
The bench had further said that it was of the prima facie view that the🎐 shareholding agreement (SHA) between FRL and FCPL, the SSA between FCPL and Amazon and the deal between FRL and Reliance Retail "are different" and "therefore, the group of companies doctrine cannot be invoked".
In its suit before the single judge for enforcing the EA award, Amazon had sought to restrain FRL from taking any steps 😼to complete the transaction with entiti🐭es that are a part of the Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani (MDA) Group.
Amazon had also sought detention of the Biyanis, directors of FCPL and FRL and other related parties in civil prison and attaching of their pr𒈔operties for alleged "wilful diso🎃bedience" of the EA order.
After the SIAC's EA order, Amazon wrote to the Securities and Exchange Board of India (Sebi), stock exchanges and C𝄹CI, urging them to take into consideration the arbitrator's ⛄interim decision as it is a binding order.
FRL thereafter moved the high co🍷urt to restrain Amazon from writing to Sebi, C🍬CI and other regulators about SIAC's order, saying it amounts to interfering with the agreement with Reliance.
A single judge on December 21 last year had on FRL's plea passed an interim order allowing Amazon to write to the statutory authorities, but also observed that prima facie it appeared the US e-commerce giant's attempt tဣo control Future Retail was violative of𝕴 FEMA and FDI rules.
-With PTI inputs.
