A division bench of the Delhi high court on Monday stayed an earlier order of a single judge of the high court that directed Future Retail Ltd (FRL) and other authorities to maintain status quo on its
Rs 24,713-crore deal with Reliance Retail.

The bench of Chief Justice D.N. Patel and Justice Jyoti Singh passed the interim direction on FRL’s appeal challenging the February 2 order of the single judge. The division bench said statutory authorities such as the National Company Law Tribunal, CCI and Sebi cannot be restrained from proceeding with the deal. The bench also declined Amazon’s request to keep its order in abeyance for a week so that it can explore appropriate remedies.

However, the court said its order would not come in the way of the order of a single judge bench of the Delhi high court. It may be recalled that last week, Justice J.R. Midha of the Delhi high court had directed FRL to maintain status quo in relation to the transaction with Reliance Retail which was objected by Amazon.com Inc.

“This Court is satisfied that immediate orders are necessary to protect the rights of the petitioner (Amazon) till the pronouncement of the reserved order. In view of the matter, the respondents are directed to maintain status quo as on today at 4:50pm till the pronouncement of the reserved order,” the judge had said in the February 2 order while reserving its order on the main petition.

It also directed all other concerned authorities to maintain status quo in relation to the matters which are in violation of the emergency award and to file status report with regard to the present status within 10 days.

During the hearing on Monday, senior advocate for FRL Harish Salve told the court that Amazon’s claims to salvage the Indian company was “humbug”.

Amazon, represented by senior advocates Gopal Subramanium and Rajiv Nayar, said FRL’s appeal against the single judge order of February 2 was not maintainable.

They also argued that the October 25, 2020 Emergency Arbitrator (EA) order by the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (SIAC) was a valid award and enforceable. The EA order had restrained FRL from proceeding with the deal with Reliance Retail.

Salve said that if Amazon wanted to salvage FRL, it could have easily invested Rs 25,000 crore which was “peanuts” for the US e-commerce giant.

He said that Amazon keeps saying it wanted to and wants to help FRL, but it was all “humbug” as it did not take any steps to do so. He also argued that the EA order was not valid as an earlier single judge order of December last year had held that there was no arbitration agreement between FRL and Amazon.

FRL had earlier told the high court that Amazon was opposing the deal with Reliance as the Mukesh Ambani firm was a competitor.