Future-Reliance deal: SC stays Delhi HC proceedings, asks NCLT, CCI, SEBI not to pass final orders

The Supreme Court stayed all the proceedings before the Delhi High Court for four weeks
related to the implementation of an award by Singapore’s Emergency Arbitrator (EA)
restraining Future Retail Ltd (FRL) from going ahead with its Rs 24,731 crore merger deal
with Reliance Retail.

A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana, in a consent order, also directed the statutory
authorities like National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), Competition Commission of India
(CCI) and market regulator Sebi not to pass any final order related to the merger deal for
next four weeks.

Track your NCLT / NCLAT cases or orders in your apple iOS / Google Android smartphones. Available for free trial period of 15 days.

It considered the statements of senior advocates Harish Salve and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing
for FRL and Future Coupons Private Ltd (FCPL) respectively, that the arbitrator has reserved
the final verdict in the case after hearing both sides.

Senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, appearing for US-based e-commerce giant Amazon
which has challenged the merger, said that it was not interested in any punitive action
against FRL, FCPL and their Directors and consented to passing of the order staying the
proceedings before the Delhi High Court.

The FRL and FCPL have moved the top court against the Delhi High Court order of August 17
which said that it would implement the earlier order by its single-judge restraining FRL from
going ahead with the deal in pursuance of the EA’s award. The High Court had also ordered
attachment of properties.

Amazon dragged Future Group to arbitration at Singapore International Arbitration Centre
(SIAC) in October last year, arguing that FRL had violated their contract by entering into the
deal with rival Reliance. On August 6, the Supreme Court gave the verdict in favour of
Amazon and held that Singapore EA’s award, restraining the Rs 24,731 crore FRL-Reliance
Retail merger deal, is valid and enforceable under the Indian arbitration laws.