The Future Group has filed a caveat before the Delhi high court requesting it to be heard if any plea is filed by e-commerce giant Amazon over its Rs 24,713 crore deal with Reliance Industries Ltd.

A PTI report said Amazon has also filed a caveat in the Delhi high court to ensure the court does not pass any adverse order without the company’s plea being heard. Amazon declined to comment .

Future group company Future Retail had said last Sunday that “an Emergency Arbitrator (EA) has no legal status” under Part I of the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996.

Future Retail had added that any attempt on the part of Amazon to enforce the EA order will be resisted “to the fullest extent available under Indian law’’.

The Singapore International Arbitration Centre on October 25 had passed an interim award in favour of Amazon, with a single-judge bench barring FRL from taking any step to dispose of or encumber its assets or issue any securities to secure any funding from a restricted party.

After the award, Amazon had written to Sebi and stock exchanges urging them to take into consideration the interim judgment. Since then, there have been speculation that Amazon may move a high court in India to enforce the order.

Anticipating a move by Amazon, the Future Group 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 Amazon.com against the respondent Future Retail, 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 without it being heard. The Future group firm has already served a copy of the caveat petition to Amazon.

Moratorium hearing

The Supreme Court on Tuesday deferred to November 5 the hearing relating to charging of interest on interest by banks on borrowers who availed of the loan moratorium scheme.

Solicitor General Tushar Mehta requested the bench to defer the hearing as he would be arguing on behalf of the Centre on the Central Vista project.