The Delhi High Court today rejected a plea from Future Coupons Private Ltd (FCPL) to end the arbitration proceedings brought by US e-commerce giant Amazon before the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC).
The Supreme Court also rejected FCPL’s other plea against a separate arbitral tribunal order that allowed Amazon’s request to supplement the statement of claim (SOC) initially filed by the tribunal in the arbitration proceeding.
Judge C Hari Shankar said that the orders of the arbitral tribunal on October 11 and June 28 are preliminary orders and that a summary judgment in an arbitration proceeding, which does not end or end the arbitration, cannot be challenged under Article 227 of the Court of Arbitration. Constitution.
The Supreme Court said it would be inappropriate for it to interfere with the interim orders.
“We reserve both sides the liberty to advance the allegations made in these petitions at the appropriate stage, therefore these petitions are dismissed as unenforceable,” the Supreme Court said in its 47-page ruling.
It also clarified that the court has not expressed an opinion on the merits of the controversy between the parties and that the arbitral proceedings can be unimpeded and unaffected by any comment in this award.
Oral arguments before the Supreme Court were presented by FCPL, Future Coupons Resources Pvt Ltd, Akar Estate and Finance Pvt Ltd and the directors of FCPL the Biyanis.
These applications have been filed in the pending pleadings regarding the ongoing legal battle between Amazon and the Future Group over Future Retail Ltd’s (FRL) Rs 24,731 crore merger agreement with Reliance Retail.
On November 17, the Supreme Court had made it clear that it will not allow a block of the arbitration proceedings pending before the Singapore International Arbitration Center (SIAC) regarding the ongoing legal battle between Amazon and the Future Group, saying that the sanctity of such a procedure is necessary to maintain.
The court heard a plea from Amazon for speedy hearing of the plea filed against the order of the Delhi Supreme Court dated November 3, subsequently extending by 10 days the time originally allotted to FCPL by the arbitral tribunal for filing of its response to Amazon’s amended arbitration request.
On February 1, the Supreme Court had overturned three Supreme Court orders, including for seizure of the property of Future Group and its directors and the refusal to grant a stay of the final arbitral award, which had prevented FRL from proceeding with its deal with Reliance. while ordering a new pronunciation.
The top court had said that FCPL and FRL were not given sufficient opportunities in hearing Amazon’s pleas against the merger agreement and requested the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to establish a bench for expeditious settlement of the case.
The Supreme Court had overturned the Supreme Court order of February 2 last year directing the FRL to maintain the status quo regarding the merger agreement.
The March 18, 2021 order of the Supreme Court upholding the Emergency Arbitral Ruling, imposing a sum of Rs 20 lakh against FRL and its directors and seizing their property, was also overturned by the Supreme Court, which ruled the pleas from the Future Group Companies regarding the arbitration ruling on the Merger Agreement with Reliance Retail back to the Delhi High Court.
The court had also overturned the Supreme Court’s October 29, 2021 order denying a stay of an arbitral tribunal decision refusing to interfere with the SIAC’s Emergency Award (EA). The EA stopped FRL from going ahead with the merger agreement.
Kishore Biyani and 15 others, including FRL and FCPL, are involved in a series of lawsuits with Amazon, an investor in FCPL, over the Reliance deal. After the EA, a three-man arbitral tribunal was set up to decide the issues arising from the deal.
(Except for the headline, this story has not been edited by DailyExpertNews staff and is being published from a syndicated feed.)
Featured video of the day
Indian industrial production grows 3.1% in September