Future-Reliance deal: Biyani-led firm moves Delhi HC against restraining order
- The appeal by FRL, Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) will be heard on 22 March by a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh, according to reports
Future Group on Saturday approached the Delhi High challenging a single judge order upholding the Singapore's Emergency Arbitrator's (EA) order restraining Future Retail Ltd (FRL) from going ahead with its proposed ₹24,713 crore asset sale deal with Mukesh Ambani-led Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL), news agency PTI reported. The appeal by FRL, Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) will be heard on 22 March by a bench of Chief Justice D N Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh, news agency said. The appeal was filed through advocate Harshvardhan Jha.
On 18 March, the Delhi High Court directed Kishore Biyani-led Future Retail not to take further action in relation to the deal with Reliance Industries. Justice J R Midha had rejected all the objections raised by Future Group and imposed a cost of ₹20 lakh on the Future Group and its directors. He directed them to deposit the amount in Prime Minister's Relief Fund within two weeks for being used for providing COVID-19 vaccination to senior citizens of Below Poverty Line (BPL) category of Delhi.
TRENDING STORIESSee All
The March 18 verdict had come on Amazon's plea seeking direction to order enforcement of the award by Singapore's EA on October 25, 2020, restraining FRL from going ahead with its ₹24,713 crore deal with Reliance Retail.
The high court, which directed the presence of Biyani and others before it on 28 April, had also ordered attachment of their properties and asked them to file an affidavit detailing their assets as on today within one month.
It had also asked them to show cause as to why they be not detained under civil prison for a term not exceeding 3 months for violating the emergency arbitrator's order and file reply within two weeks.
The single judge, which has listed the matter for 28 April for reporting compliance of its order, had held that the EA is an arbitrator for all intents and purposes and he had rightly invoked the 'Group of Companies' doctrine in relation to the Future Group companies.
It had said the respondents have raised a vague plea of nullity without substantiating the same and it was done to mislead this Court.
It had also directed the Future Group to approach authorities for recalling the approvals granted for the FRL-Reliance deal and also asked them not to violate the EA's October 25 last year order.
MORE FROM THIS SECTIONSee All
The high court had also asked the Future Group to place on record the details of action taken by it in connection with the Reliance deal after the 25 October, 2020 order.
Amazon, in its interim plea, had sought to restrain FRL from taking any steps to complete the transaction with entities that are a part of the Mukesh Dhirubhai Ambani (MDA) Group.
Future Group and Amazon have been locked in a battle after the US-based company took FRL into the emergency arbitration over alleged breach of a contract between them.
Justice Midha had earlier, in an interim order, directed FRL to maintain status quo in relation to its deal with Reliance. However, it was stayed by the division bench of the high court.
Amazon challenged the division bench's order before the Supreme Court where the plea is pending.
Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC, in its plea, had also sought detention of the Biyanis, directors of Future Coupons Pvt Ltd (FCPL) and FRL and other related parties in civil prison and attaching of their properties for alleged "wilful disobedience" of the emergency arbitrator's order.\
In August last year, Future had reached an agreement to sell its retail, wholesale, logistics and warehousing units to Reliance.
(With inputs from PTI)
Click here to read the Mint ePaperMint is now on Telegram. Join Mint channel in your Telegram and stay updated with the latest business news.