Amazon Ready To Help Future Retail In Financial Problems : Gopal Subramanium Tells Supreme Court

In the Future- Amazon dispute, the lawyers of the American e-commerce giant argued before the Supreme Court that Future Retail Ltd (FRL) and Futur Coupons Private Ltd (FCPL) have repeatedly violated the injunction orders passed by the Emergency Arbitrartor and hence, they cannot seek reliefs from the Court..Senior Advocate Gopal Subramaniam, appearing for Amazon, argued that the process adopted by the Future Group completely undermines and defeats the proceedings of arbitration. Amazon, therefore, urged the Court to consider imposing a condition on the Future Group to obey the Tribunal's order.Amazon's Response To Future's Arguments Of Employees Losing Jobs & Financial LossResponding to Future Group's submissions that the Future Retail will sink with 30000 employees losing their jobs if FRL's deal with Reliance doesn't go through, Mr Subramanium submitted that Amazon has been willing to assist them with the financial problem and has said the same both before the Emergency Arbitrator and the Enforcement Court."It is not that only breach of the order will help a company. We have been crying to help. Throughout we have been making an offer, we are ready to help. We said we're interested, why would be not interested in the survival of this entity when we have rights under the agreement", he said.'Future Retail Will Sink With 30,000 Employees If Reliance Deal Doesn't Get Through' : Future Group Lawyers To Supreme Court In Case Against Amazon A Bench comprising Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli reserved its orders in the following two pleas: * Special Leave Petitions of Future Coupons and Future Retail against Delhi High Court's Single Bench March 2021 order directing attachment of assets of Future group companies and its promoters for breach of Emergency Award (order passed by a single bench of Justice Midha) * Special Leave Petitions of both FRL and FCPL challenging Delhi High Court's 29th October order which refused to stay the Singapore Arbitration Tribunal's refusal to vacate the Emergency Award restraining it to continue with Reliance deal. The Emergency arbitrator through its order dated 25th October 2020 has restricted FRL from going forward with its deal with Reliance and injuncted FRL from taking steps in furtherance of the Scheme (Scheme of Arrangement with Reliance). The Arbitral Tribunal constituted to hear Future-Amazon dispute reinforced the Emergency Arbitrator's order on October 21, 2022 and dismissed FRL's plea to vacate the order of the Emergency Arbitrator.Submissions By Senior Advocate Gopal Subramanium for Amazon: Appearing on behalf of Amazon, Mr Subramanium submitted that FRL acted in breach of the interim prohibitory order passed by the Emergency Arbitrator and because of that Amazon filed an enforcement application which led to Justice Midha's order. He added that the Supreme Court's order on 6th August 2021 took view that EA is a validly constituted Tribunal for purpose of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act and such orders are capable of effective enforcement under Sec 17(2) of the Act.Not Interested In Penalising FRL:Mr Subramanium submitted that as far as directions of imposing penalty like imprisonment are concerned, he had earlier submitted that Amazon is not interested in penalizing the Future group and its promotes and it was only seeking compliance of the directions. "I'm not interested in punishment but there is something called Rule of law and that is what Justice Nariman said that if it is binding on you, you must obey the order", Mr Subramanium said Arbitral Tribunal's Award Must Be complied with Until Its Suspended in Proper Appeal:Mr Subramanium argued that the Arbitral Tribunal pronounced its order on Oct 21, 2021, rejecting FRL's application for vacation of EA's order. The net effect therefore is that until the order of Arbitral Tribunal is suspended in proper appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act that order must be complied with. He added that the only reason the petitioners wanted Justice Midha's order to be vacated was because it said that EA's order is a valid order and has to be complied with.In response to the Court's suggestion that FRL's appeal against order of the Tribunal may be heard by the High Court, Mr Subramanium submitted that FRL certainly is entitled to an appeal under Sec 37 of the Arbitration Act and Amazon has absolutely no difficulty in the matter but being dealt with. He added that till the Single Judge decides the matter it is essential that FRL must abide by the Tribunal's order.Justice Midha's Order Issued in an Enforcement Petition Hence Justified:Defending Justice Midha's order, Mr Subramanium said Justice Midha's judgement was delivered in a jurisdiction under Section 17(2) of the Act and if the award has to be enforced like a decree or order of a court under Section 17(2), then directions have to be passed to enforce the order. As it was an...

Amazon Ready To Help Future Retail In Financial Problems : Gopal Subramanium Tells Supreme Court

Srishti Ojha

"Why would be not interested in the survival of this entity when we have rights under the agreement?" Subramanium submitted.

Tags