Future Retail Ltd and Future Coupons Pvt Ltd have moved the Division Bench of Delhi High Court challenging recent order of the single bench that had upheld the Emergency Award passed against the Future-Reliance deal.
The Division Bench of Justice DN Patel and Justice Jasmeet Singh on Monday will hear the petition.
While upholding the Emergency Award passed against the Future-Reliance deal, the single bench of Justice JR Midha on Thursday imposed costs of Rs 20 lakh on the Future group.
A Single-Judge Bench said that the Singapore arbitration order is enforceable.
The Court accepted Amazon's pleas against the deal, rejected Future Group's arguments, and said the order of emergency arbitrator valid, enforceable under Indian law.
Justice Midha also said that Future Retail Group has deliberately disobeyed the order and liable to face action under the code of civil procedure. The Court also issued show-cause notice to Future Retail and others, asking them why they should not be detained in civil prison. Further, the High Court had directed to attach properties of CEO Kishore Biy and others related to Future Group.
The Court also directed Future Group's Directors to appear in person before April 28, the next date fixed for hearing.
Earlier the Court had directed Future Retail Limited to maintain the status quo with respect to deal with Reliance while granting interim relief to Amazon.
The Single Bench had ordered on Amazon plea where the petitioner has submitted that the respondents including Future Coupons Private Limited have deliberately and willfully violated and are continuing further with the violation of the order dated 25th October 2020 of the Emergency Arbitrator. The petitioner has sought an immediate interim order to protect its rights till the pronouncement of the reserved order.
The respondents are objecting to the enforcement of the order dated 25th October 2020 passed by the Emergency Arbitrator on various grounds, inter alia, that the Emergency Arbitrator is not an Arbitrator/ Arbitral Tribunal; the order dated 25th October 2020 is not an order under Section 17( 1) and is not enforceable under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the respondent is not a party to the arbitration agreement and the order dated 25th October, 2020 is a nullity, the court had said.
The court, however, said that "This Court is of the prima facie view that the Emergency Arbitrator is an Arbitrator; the Emergency Arbitrator has rightly proceeded against the respondent; the order dated 25th October 2020 is not a nullity; the order dated 25th October 2020 is an order under Section 17(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act."
"This Court is of the view that the order dated 25th October 2020 is appealable under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. This Court is of the clear view that the order dated 25th October 2020 is enforceable as an order of this Court under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act. The detailed reasons shall be given in the reserved order," the court said.
The court also directed all the concerned authorities to maintain the status quo with respect to all matters in violation of the order dated 25th October 2020 and shall file the status report with respect to the present status within ten days of the receipt of this order.
( With inputs from ANI )
Disclaimer: This post has been auto-published from an agency feed without any modifications to the text and has not been reviewed by an editor