'What Is The Point Of Filing So Many Volumes? To Drag Hearing Or To Harass Judges?': CJI In Amazon- Future Case

The Chief Justice of India on Tuesday expressed displeasure towards enormous volumes of documents filed by parties in the cases relating to the Amazon- Future dispute."Sorry to say this, what's the point of filing so many volumes? It is with purpose of dragging on or otherwise to harass judges?Is there any other purpose of filing these many documents? What is the point?" CJI Ramana remarkedA Bench comprising the Chief Justice of India NV Ramana, Justice AS Bopanna and Justice Hima Kohli directed the parties to file a convenience compilation with minimum number of documents which are properly indexed.After Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Future Coupons Private Ltd suggested that counsels from both sides can exchange their documents and file a common compilation, the Bench observed that "All parties agree to exchange documents and file one common compilation. Matter to be taken up on 8th Dec. Documents to be fully indexed."The Bench made the remarks after it faced difficulty in locating one of its earlier orders being referred to by the Counsel from the volumes of documents filed. "This is the problem you file 21 volumes in each case. I've been repeatedly saying. This is what happens. Unnecessary things, repetition of documents!" CJI Ramana saidAddressing the Counsel appearing Amazon, the other side, CJI Ramana further said "so many volumes were filed yesterday, is it necessary? Already other side filed some documents can't you rely on that?"The Bench thereafter suggested that it can grant some time to the counsels so they can file a convenience compilationThe CJI led Bench was hearing the following petitions:Two Special leave petitions filed by Future Coupons Private Ltd and Future Retail Ltd against the against the order passed by the single bench of the Delhi High Court that directed the attachment of assets of Future group companies and its promoters Kishore Biyani and others for breach of the Emergency Award.Two Special leave petitions filed by Future Coupons Private Ltd and Future Retail Ltd challenging Delhi High Court's 29th October order refusing to grant an ad interim stay on the order passed by a Singapore based Arbitration Tribunal which refused to interfere with the Emergency Award restraining it to continue with the Reliance deal.The Singapore International Arbitration Centre had in October rejected Future Group's plea to vacate the interim stay on the company's deal with Reliance passed in October last yearAn application filed by E-commerce giant Amazon against NCLT's September 28th order allowing Future Group's listed companies to hold shareholders and creditors meetings to seek approval to sell assets to Reliance Retail Retail Ventures Ltd. The Bench had on last occasion issued notice in the application and had orally asked the Future Group to not do anything in that regard, after a request was made on behalf of Amazon.The Bench also refused to entertain an application filed by IDBI Trusteeship Services Ltd. seeking clarification of the Supreme Court's 9th September 2021 order whereby it stayed the proceedings instituted by Amazon for the enforcement of the Emergency Award passed in its favour by a Singapore-based arbitrator which halted the merger deal between Future Retail Limited and Reliance group. Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul appearing for IDBI Trusteeship submitted that they are seeking a clarification of the top court's order as they have moved an application before Delhi High Court and want that to be taken up." Did we ask HC to not entertain any first proceeding, it was only with regard to subject matter of this SLP. Where is the ambiguity?" the Bench said.Mr Kaul informed the Bench that notice has already been issued on his application before the Delhi High Court and but after Supreme Court's order all matters have been adjourned to 4th January. " That is not my concern, if High Court adjourns your case its a matter for this court to interfere?" CJI said.Justice Hima Kohli stated that the order referred to "any further proceeding before Delhi High Court' which assumes that it will apply to pending proceedings."Feel free to move an application before High Court, point it out before the HC that order was pertaining to pending proceeding, and your application be taken up." Justice Kohli said.The Bench them permitted Senior Counsel Kaul to withdraw the application and move the High Court. FRL's Plea Against Delhi High Court's October OrderThe Future Group has filed a special leave petition before the Supreme Court challenging Delhi High Court's 29th October order rejecting its plea of an ad interim stay on the order passed by a Singapore based Arbitration Tribunal which refused to interfere with the Emergency Award restraining it to continue with the Reliance deal.The Singapore International Arbitration Centre had in October rejected Future Group's plea to vacate the interim stay on the company's deal with Reliance passed in October last yearSenior Advocate Harish...

'What Is The Point Of Filing So Many Volumes? To Drag Hearing Or To Harass Judges?': CJI In Amazon- Future Case

Srishti Ojha

Tags