A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had stayed the arbitral tribunal proceedings in January
A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had stayed the arbitral tribunal proceedings in January
Amazon and Future group on Wednesday prima facie agreed in the Supreme Court to resume proceedings before an arbitral tribunal in a dispute over Future’s ₹24,500-crore deal with Reliance.
Earlier this week, the parties had informed the apex court that talks for an amicable settlement of the dispute had made no headway.
Appearing before a Bench led by Chief Justice of India N.V. Ramana on Wednesday, senior advocate Gopal Subramaniam, for Amazon, submitted that his client had “no difficulty” if proceedings before the arbitral tribunal resumed. A Division Bench of the Delhi High Court had stayed the arbitral tribunal proceedings in January.
Both Amazon and senior advocates Harish Salve and Mukul Rohatgi, for Future group companies, agreed that they could even request the tribunal to take up and decide, on a priority basis, a pending application filed under Section 32 of the Arbitration Act to terminate the arbitration process in the Amazon-Future dispute.
“This entire dispute started because our application under Section 32 to terminate the arbitration proceedings was not taken up at the relevant time in January. Now if the tribunal can take our application in the month of April, then all these proceedings can come to an end,” Mr. Rohatgi said.
“The sooner we make the request the better,” Mr. Subramaniam submitted.
However, Mr. Subramaniam drew the court’s attention to the eventuality of the tribunal deciding not to terminate the arbitration process after all. In that case, the arbitral tribunal should be asked to order the arbitration process to be completed expeditiously, he suggested.
Meanwhile, he urged the apex court to pass an interim order to protect the retail assets of Future so that they do not “disappear” by the time the dispute was finally decided.
Amazon had urged the Supreme Court on Tuesday to intervene and ensure that Future retail assets were not taken over by Reliance.
Mr. Subramaniam submitted that attempts were being made to “topple the apple cart” and “things were being done.”
“Things are being done… If I were to lose, without a manner of doubt, the scheme [the deal] will go through and the assets will go through the scheme to Reliance. I have no issue at all. But if I succeed, the assets should be there. I only want a protective order in relation to the retail assets,” Mr. Subramaniam pleaded.
Mr. Salve said Amazon has already approached the Delhi High Court on this issue. “It is listed on Tuesday. That [High Court] is where he should be pressing for this relief,” Mr. Salve submitted.
The Bench suggested to Mr. Subramaniam that since parties have no objections in resuming proceedings before the arbitral tribunal, Amazon should seek interim orders from there. But Mr. Subramaniam said the tribunal had passed injunction orders twice in past.
“Till today, there is no adherence. What is then the point of me going to the tribunal and getting another interim order? As we speak today, while everything is pending, people actually frolic with the assets… Then what is the point of me going to the tribunal with another application for an interim order?” Mr. Subramaniam asked.
He said the situation was “extraordinary.” “How can I deal with a situation that assets disappear in violation of an injunction and I go back to the tribunal for yet another injunction. I have two injunctions. One on October 25, 2020 and another one, a mandatory injunction, on October 21, 2021. At least, protect whatever can be protected till the end of the arbitration…” Mr. Subramaniam urged the court.
The Bench listed the case next on April 1 and asked Future companies to file a response to Amazon’s application seeking an order for resumption of hearing before the arbitral tribunal and interim order of protection of assets.
For all the latest business News Click Here
