CCI, SEBI Approval to Reliance-FRL Deal Disregards Law: Amazon Tells Delhi High Court

The court directed both parties to file a 5 page note with relevant portions of judgement and other details by 5.30 pm today and posted the case for further hearing tomorrow.

Amazon sought ad-interim injunction against the Single Judge bench order of the Delhi High Court delivered by Justice Mukta Gupta. Appearing for Amazon, Sr. Adv. Gopal Subramanium submitted, "No action has been taken by any Respondents to reverse or modify the emergency award," and that in the absence of the same, especially when the parties had undertaken to abide by the order of the Emergency Arbitrator, declaring the award to be a nullity was against the law.

"They have chosen not to file any appeal," he said.

He pointed out that a series of letters had been written by FRL to various authorities, including SEBI and the CCI, saying that the award should be ignored, even though there is an express provision under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, that interim awards are in fact orders of the court under S.17(2).

"There is no law under which a party can unilaterally declare an award to be a nullity", he pressed.

Inter alia, Amazon prayed for an injunction restraining FRL and others from taking steps in furtherance of the deal with Reliance and disposing of FRL's retail assets.

FRL appeared in the matter through Sr. Adv. Darius Khambata who sought time to file his objections to the petition. However, the court declined the request.

In his submissions, Khambata highlighted various definitions under the SIAC Rules and submitted that application of Section 17(1) would require an arbitral tribunal and its award to be passed during arbitration proceedings. However, according to the Rules themselves, the Emergency Arbitrator only operates before the operation of the tribunal.