Future Group led by Kishore Biyani has filed two caveat petitions against Amazon in the Delhi High Court. The petitions will reportedly ensure that Future Group gets a chance to be heard before the court passes any order. This comes after Future Group said Amazon had sought ₹1,431 crore plus interest in damages.
Anticipating a move by Amazon, which had got an interim arbitration award in its favour, putting the announced deal on hold, the Future Group firm has moved the Delhi High Court.
Let no order of any kind be passed or any other petition and application, which may be filed by the petitioners/caveatee (Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC) against the respondent/caveator - Future Retail Ltd, without due notice under section 148A of the code of civil procedure, the Future Group firm stated in its urgent caveat petition.
A caveat is filed by a litigant in High Courts and in the Supreme Court to ensure that no adverse order is passed against the party without it being heard. The Future group firm has already served a copy of the caveat petition to Amazon.
On October 25, Singapore International’s Arbitration Centre (SIAC) passed an interim award in favour of Amazon, with a single-judge bench of V K Rajah barring FRL from taking any step to dispose of or encumber its assets or issuing any securities to secure any funding from a restricted party.
However, on Sunday, in a regulatory filing Future Retail Ltd (FRL) said Singapore arbitrator’s interim order against its ₹24,713 crore deal with RIL is not binding , any attempt to enforce it will be resisted
As per SIAC order, a three-member arbitration panel, with one judge each would be appointed by Future and Amazon - and a third neutral judge would preside, would decide on the issue in 90 days.
In its filing, FRL had said that it has been advised that an Emergency Arbitrator (EA) has no legal status under Part I of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 and therefore, the proceedings are void and Coram non-judice .
The EA Order having been passed by an authority without jurisdiction is a “nullity under Indian law”. Last week Amazon had written to markets regulator SEBI and Stock Exchanges urging them to take into consideration the Singapore arbitrator’s interim judgement.
Over allegations by Amazon that public shareholders of FRL are being misled, the Future group contended. FRL said it has complied with all SEBI requirements, and EA Order cannot and does not in any manner restrict SEBI or the Stock Exchanges from considering and approving the Scheme with RIL.
“It is humbly submitted that BSE and NSE ought not to take cognisance of Amazon’s letter or the EA Order. It is submitted that SEBI and the Stock Exchanges should consider the Scheme independently on its merits, and as per SEBI regulations, said FRL in the filing.”
