The second day of Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings Vs Future Retail Ltd. litigation in the Supreme Court saw both sides argue the question of maintainability.
Specifically, over whether the Future Group could have approached the high court division bench for a stay against the enforcement order passed by the high court bench of Justice JR Midha.
Amazon said the Future Group couldn’t have approached the high court’s division bench to seek a stay on the enforcement of the emergency arbitrator’s award.
The Singapore based emergency arbitrator‘s October 2020 order put on hold the Rs 27,513-crore transaction between Future Retail and Reliance Retail Ltd. The transaction included the sale of Future Retail‘s retail, wholesale, logistics and warehousing assets to Reliance Retail.
The Delhi High Court in March found the award of the emergency arbitrator to be valid and capable of being enforced by Indian courts.
Against this order, Future Retail approached the division bench which stayed the operation of the single judge bench order. Subsequently, the case landed in the top court.
The arguments today were on maintainability of the appeal before the division bench.