Amazon-Future dispute: SC asks whether or not it may possibly move orders restraining alienation of FRL’s belongings

The Supreme Court Friday requested whether or not it may possibly move any interim order on a plea of Amazon that Future Retail Ltd’s belongings together with ‘Big Bazaar shops’ not be alienated until the dispute over it’s merger with Reliance Retail is set by the arbitral tribunal.

A bench headed by Chief Justice N V Ramana, which has now posted the plea of US e-commerce main for additional listening to on April 4, mentioned the landlords of the FRL’s retailers will not be earlier than it and the query is that if such an order restraining the alienation of belongings until conclusion of arbitration might be handed.

“If tenants or landlords are not before us how can the court pass an order injuncting them from taking possession (of shops),” mentioned the bench which additionally comprised Justices Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli.

At the outset, senior advocate Gopal Subramanium, showing for the US agency, mentioned that so far as resumption of the arbitration proceedings are involved, there was no distinction of opinion between Amazon and Future group.

“But there cannot be sudden handover of assets,” Subramanium mentioned, including that the US agency wanted an interim order “against alienation of the assets in favour of any other party and assets must continue to remain with FRL and operate with FRL until matter is resolved by the arbitral tribunal.” He mentioned that over 800 retailers of FRL have been vacated and brought over by Reliance group.

Senior advocate Harish Salve, showing for FRL, mentioned that round 374 retailers are with the group and it isn’t going to present them to anyone by itself except some landlords throw it out.

“My bank accounts are frozen I can’t pay rent. Everyone is hoping if scheme gets through Reliance comes in and everyone will get the money,” he mentioned, including that there was no cash to pay the leases and furthermore, if the lending banks come it then the IBC (Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code) will are available image.

The bench was additionally instructed by senior advocate Rakesh Dwivedi, showing for lending banks of Future group, that no interim order, which is prejudicial to the pursuits of the banks, be handed within the matter.

The bench has now posted the matter for additional listening to on April 4 when Amazon would reply to the submissions of Future group. Earlier, the bench had assured an early listening to on the plea of Amazon.

Prior to this, Amazon had apprehended the “disappearance” of belongings and sought an interim order from the highest court docket to make sure the preservation of belongings of Future Retail Ltd in addition to resumption of arbitration over FRL’s merger cope with Reliance Retail. The bench had taken word of the allegations of the US agency that the “applecart was being upset” by its rivals and requested the Future group corporations, FRL and Future Coupons Ltd (FCPL), to reply to the interim plea of Amazon.

Amazon and Future group are engaged in multi-forum litigation on the problem of FRL’s merger deal to the tune of Rs 24,500 crore with Reliance Retail Ltd after the US e-commerce big dragged FRL to arbitration on the Singapore International Arbitration Centre in October 2020.

It has been alleged by Amazon that on March 3, as many as 600 shops of FRL had been taken away by Reliance.

The plea was vehemently objected to by the Future group legal professionals on Tuesday.

The high court docket was instructed by Amazon that in addition to looking for resumption of arbitral proceedings, it needed an order in order that the FRL’s belongings are there for it if it wins the arbitration because the “applecart was being upset”.

The bench is listening to Amazon’s enchantment towards the January 5 order of the Delhi High Court, which stayed the arbitration proceedings earlier than the arbitral tribunal over Future Retail’s merger cope with Reliance Retail.