- the
Delhi High Court has rejectedFuture retail Request for an interim injunction against the global e-commerce giantAmazon . - However, the order also said that a prima facie Future Retail resolution approving the Reliance deal was also valid.
- Amazon had sent Future Coupons a legal notice regarding Future Group’s ₹ 25,000 crore deal with Reliance.
Reliance Industries agreed to buy Future Group, but Amazon objected. The company run by Jeff Bezos has already received an order from a Singaporean arbitrator preventing the agreement between Mukesh Ambani and Kishore Biyani from moving forward.
In response, Future Group turned to the Delhi High Court seeking to prevent the global e-commerce giant from interfering in the deal between. What the court said in its verdict is a case of “successful operation but dead patient,” said Hitesh Jain, managing partner at Parinam Law Associates.
The court said Amazon is free to challenge the deal and the spokesperson chose to highlight that part. “We welcome the verdict of the Honorable Delhi High Court rejecting the injunction requested by Future Retail and its claim that the Emergency Arbitrator process is invalid under Indian law,” the Amazon spokesperson told Business Insider.
The court wants authorities to make a decision based on Amazon’s request and Future Group’s objections, explained Supreme Court attorney Yamuna Natchiappan.
However, while it allowed Amazon to appeal to other regulators such as the Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) or the Competition Commission of India (CCI), the Delhi High Court in its order said that prima facie, the lawsuit filed by Future Retail is Maintainable, Emergency Award is valid, and Future Retail’s resolution approving the Reliance deal was also valid.
What’s worse for Amazon? The Delhi High Court has essentially ruled that Amazon cannot use an agreement with a Future group company, ie Future Coupon, to exercise control over an agreement reached by another company, ie Future Retail. That would be a violation of the Indian Currency Management Act (FEMA). Not only that, the court went further by saying that this “amounts to unlawful interference.”
Ad
And that only tips the case in Biyani’s favor. “If there is a prima facie case, then the balance of convenience follows the party that has the prima facie case,” according to Jain.
Based on this verdict, Jain believes that the Future group can move the Supreme Court against Amazon.
Whether it will or not remains to be seen. As for the resolution that Amazon attempted to challenge, which is the board resolution of August 29, said resolution has been considered valid and therefore there can be no interference in relation to the scheme, said the legal representative of Future Retail, Ameet Naik.
ET NOW.
SEE ALSO:
Sensex sees that 2 weeks of profit are eliminated in half a day: it sinks by more than 1,400 points
.
