38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, February 15, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Business

Amazon requests Supreme Court to stay HC order until conclusion of Future-Reliance Deal dispute

By Shreyas Nair      12 April, 2021 12:19 PM      0 Comments
Amazon requests Supreme Court to stay HC order until conclusion of Future-Reliance Deal dispute

Amazon has moved the Supreme Court challenging the Delhi High Court's division bench order that had vacated a stay on Kishore Biyani-led Future Group proceeding with its Rs 24,713 crore asset sale to Reliance Industries.

Amazon asked for a stay of the division bench's (March 22, 2021) decision, calling it "illegal," "random," "inequitable," and "unfair" 

Future Group was issued a reprieve from a (March 18, 2021) single-judge order prohibiting it from selling properties to Reliance on (March 22, 2021), by a division bench of the High Court of Delhi. 

Amazon has now challenged the (March 22, 2021) injunction in the Supreme Court, seeking a stay until the conclusion of the earlier deal-related lawsuit. 

The Interim order & stay of the impugned Interim Common Order dated (March 22, 2021) passed by the Honourable High Court of Delhi before the questions raised herein are eventually resolved by this Honourable Court, Amazon wrote in its Supreme Court petition. Amazon's petition, a copy of which was seen by the news agency. It also asked the Superior Court to issue some further orders that it "may find fit & proper in the facts & conditions of the current case."

Amazon & Future Retail Ltd (FRL) did not respond to e-mailed queries:

The division bench made a grave mistake in passing an injunction in a non-maintainable appeal, allowing Future Group to continue to violate the EA (Emergency Arbitration) order, according to Amazon's plea. 

The single judge had delivered a well-reasoned order covering over 130 pages, according to Amazon, and the division bench had issued an emergency order in a mechanical way, halting operations for the same reasons. As a result, the petitioner (Amazon) came before this Court by filing an SLP (special leave petition), it said.

Previously, Amazon had filed a complaint with the Supreme Court after a single judge issued an interim order on February 2, 2021, halting the deal, and a division bench on February 8, 2021, stayed the order's action over a plea filed by FRL.

The Supreme Court then provided notice in response to Amazon's plea, allowing the scheme of a deal between Future and Reliance to continue before the Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT), but these bodies were not to issue any orders sanctioning the deal.

The plea is set for hearing on (April 27, 2021).

The Future-Reliance contract, which is being challenged by multinational e-commerce behemoth Amazon, has already secured CCI, SEBI, and bourse approval, and the scheme of arrangement is now pending NCLT and shareholder approval. In the Rs 24,713 crore deal announced in August last year, Future Group's retail and wholesale assets will be consolidated into one company, Future Enterprises Ltd, before being transferred to Reliance Retail Ventures Ltd (RRVL). Meanwhile, Reliance Retail has extended the deadline for the sale to close by six months, to September 30, 2021.

Since the US e-commerce company took Future Group to SIAC arbitration in October last year, claiming that the latter had breached their contract by entering into the agreement with rival Reliance, the two companies have been embroiled in a bitter legal battle. In August of 2019, Amazon made a strategic investment in Future Coupons, with the option to buy into the flagship Future Retail after three to ten years.

On (October 25, 2020), a single-judge bench led by V K Rajah passed an interim order in favour of Amazon, prohibiting Future Retail from disposing of or encumbering its properties or selling securities to obtain funding from a restricted entity.



Share this article:



Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

resignation-on-medical-grounds-attracts-forfeiture-of-pension-service-madras-hc-full-bench
Trending Judiciary
Resignation on Medical Grounds Attracts Forfeiture of Pension Service: Madras HC Full Bench [Read Order]

Madras High Court Full Bench rules resignation on medical grounds leads to forfeiture of past service under Tamil Nadu Pension Rules, 1978.

09 February, 2026 12:16 PM
madras-hc-clarifies-section-37-of-ndps-act-not-applicable-to-acceptance-of-bond-for-appearance
Trending Judiciary
Madras HC Clarifies: Section 37 of NDPS Act Not Applicable to Acceptance of Bond for Appearance [Read Order]

Madras High Court says Section 37 NDPS Act doesn’t apply to acceptance of bond for appearance on summons, as it is distinct from grant of bail.

09 February, 2026 12:20 PM
sc-refers-matter-to-larger-bench-to-resolve-conflicting-judgments-on-third-partys-right-under-under-order-ix-rule-13-cpc
Trending Judiciary
SC Refers Matter To Larger Bench To Resolve Conflicting Judgments On Third Party’s Right Under Under Order IX Rule 13 CPC [Read Order]

Supreme Court refers the issue of third party rights under Order IX Rule 13 CPC to a larger bench to resolve conflicting judgments on ex parte decrees.

09 February, 2026 12:35 PM
bombay-sessions-court-grants-bail-in-193-crore-cyber-fraud-case-reaffirms-bail-is-rule-jail-is-exception
Trending Judiciary
Bombay Sessions Court Grants Bail in ₹1.93 Crore Cyber Fraud Case, Reaffirms ‘Bail Is Rule, Jail Is Exception’ [Read Order]

Bombay Sessions Court grants bail in ₹1.93 crore cyber fraud case, citing right to liberty as investigation is complete and accused not direct beneficiary.

09 February, 2026 04:17 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email