/2022 INSC 0142/
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
 
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 859­860 OF 2022
FUTURE COUPONS PRIVATE LIMITED      … APPELLANTS
& ORS.         
Versus
AMAZON.COM NV INVESTMENT      … RESPONDENTS
HOLDINGS LLC & ORS.
     
WITH
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 861­862 OF 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 864 OF 2022
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 863 OF 2022
O R D E R
1. Before we deal with the issue at hand, it may be necessary
to   recount   brief   facts.   Aggrieved   by   the   sale   transaction
between   Future   Retail   Limited   (FRL)­Reliance   Group,
Amazon   initiated   an   arbitration   proceeding   before   the
1 REPORTABLE

Singapore   International   Arbitration   Center   (SIAC),   in   terms
of Future Coupons Pvt. Ltd. (FCPL)­Amazon agreements. 
2. Amazon   filed   an   application   for   emergency   relief   with   the
registrar   of   the   SIAC   court   of   arbitration   seeking   interim
prohibitory injunction to prevent FRL and FCPL from taking
further steps in the aforesaid transaction with the Reliance
group.   Parallelly,   FRL   filed   a   suit   before   the   Delhi   High
Court   in   CS(COMM)   No.   493   of   2020,   against   amazon   for
tortious interference in the scheme for the sale of assets.
3. Emergency Arbitrator, by order dated 25.10.2020, injuncted
FRL from taking any steps to materialize the deal, including
injunction   against   proceedings   before   various   Regulatory
authorities. However, by order dated 21.12.2020, Delhi High
Court came to a conclusion that Regulatory authorities had
to pass appropriate orders considering the representation of
both FRL and Amazon, before granting approvals.
4. In   the   meanwhile,   CCI   and   SEBI   approved   the   Scheme
following   the   filing   of   the   FRL   suit.   Further,   FRL   filed
sanction of the composite Scheme of Arrangement under the
2

provisions of Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013
before   National   Company   Law   Tribunal   (NCLT)   for   its
consideration on 26.01.2021, which is pending.
5. Amazon   filed   a   Petition   for   enforcement   of   Emergency
Arbitrator award before the Delhi High Court on 25.01.2021
in   OMP   (ENF)   (COMM.)   No.17   of   2021.   Vide   orders   dated
02.02.2021   and   18.03.2021,   Delhi   High   Court   passed
orders  inter alia , enforcing the emergency award.
6. When   the   matter   was   carried   by   Amazon   to   this   Court   in
SLP  (C) No. 2856­57 of  2021,   vide   order  dated 22.02.2021,
this   Court   allowed   the   NCLT   proceedings   to   continue
without culminating in a final order of Sanction of Scheme.
7. However,   as   noted   earlier,   this   Court   by   final   order   dated
06.08.2021,   did   not   adjudicate   the   merits   of   the   case   and
limited   its   reasoning   only   to   answering   the   legal   questions
concerning   the   maintainability   of   a   first   appeal   against   an
order   of   the   learned   Single   Judge   in   an   enforcement
proceeding.
3

8. Aggrieved   by   the   merits   of   the   orders   of   the   learned   Single
Judge   dated   02.02.2021   and   18.03.2021,   FCPL   and   FRL
filed appeals directly before this Court in SLP (C) No. 13547­
48 of  2021  and SLP  (C)  No. 13556­57 of  2021 respectively.
This   court   by   interim   order   dated   09.09.2021,   passed   the
following order:
“Heard   learned   senior   counsel   for   the
parties   at   length   and   carefully   perused   the
material placed on record. 
Issue notice. 
Taking   into   consideration   the
submissions advanced by the learned senior
counsel   for   the   parties   and   particularly   the
fact   that   the   parties   have   approached   the
Singapore   International   Arbitration   Centre
for   vacating   the   Emergency   Award   passed
by   the   Emergency   Arbitrator   and   the
arguments   in   the   said   matter   have   been
concluded   and   the   order   is   going   to   be
pronounced shortly,   we think it fit to balance
the   interest   of   both   the   parties   by   staying   all
further   proceedings   before   the   Delhi   High
Court   for   the  time  being.  Ordered  accordingly.
We   further   direct   to   all   the   authorities   i.e.
NCLT,   CCI   and   SEBI   not   to   pass   any   final
order for a period of four weeks from today.
This   order   has   been   passed   with   the
consent of both the parties. 
List these matters after four weeks.”
( Emphasis supplied )
4

9. Thereafter,   the   applications   filed   by   FRL   and   FCPL   for
vacating   the   award   of   the   Emergency   Arbitrator   was
dismissed   by   the   Arbitral   Tribunal   by   order   dated
21.10.2021.   The   aforesaid   order   of   the   Arbitral   Tribunal,
rejecting   the   vacate   application,   was   challenged   by   FCPL
and FRL before the Delhi High Court in Arb. Pet. No. 63 of
2021   and   Arb.   Pet.   No.   64   of   2021.   The   Delhi   High   Court,
while   issuing   notice   in   both   the   matters   by   orders   dated
29.10.2021,   rejected   immediate   relief   to   FRL.   Aggrieved   by
the   aforesaid   orders,   FCPL   and   FRL   have   approached   this
Court   in   SLP   (C)   Nos.   18089   and   18080   of   2021
respectively.
10. This Court by a detailed order dated 01.02.2022, passed the
following order in SLP (C) Nos. 13547­13548, 13556­13557,
18089 and 18080 of 2021  :
“Leave granted.
..…….
“ I.   Setting   aside   of   impugned   orders
dated   02.02.2021   (1st   impugned   Order)
and 18.03.2021 (2nd impugned order) in
OMP (ENF)(Comm.) No. 17 of 2021. 
5

II.   Setting   aside   of   3rd   impugned   order
dated 29.10.2021 in Arb. A. (Comm.) No.
64   and   63   of   2021.   The   learned   Single
Judge   shall   reconsider   the   issues   and
pass   appropriate   orders   on   its   own
merits, uninfluenced by any observation
made herein.” 
At the time of the arguments of these
matters,   learned   Senior   Counsel   for
the   appellants   argued   vehemently   for
continuation   of   proceedings   before
the  NCLT  during  the  pendency of  the
above   remanded   matters.   After
reserving   these   matters,   W.P.   (C)   No.
48 of 2022 was filed by Future Retail
Limited   and   mentioned   before   this
Bench   on   27.01.2022.   We   are   of   the
opinion   that   the   facts   pleaded   and
arguments   raised   in   the   writ   petition
may   have   a   bearing   on   the   above­
mentioned   relief.   We,   therefore,
consider   it   apposite   to   defer   our
orders   in   this   context.   We   will
consider   this   relief   at   the   time   of
hearing of aforesaid writ petition. 
Post these matters along with W.P. (C)
No. 48 of 2022. 
After   the   pronouncement   of   this
judgment,   learned   Senior   Counsel   for
the   appellant,   Mr.   Harish   Salve
sought   posting   of   all   these   matters
before   one   Bench.   In   view   of   the
prayer   made,   we   request   the   Chief
Justice of Delhi High Court to post all
these matters before one Bench.”
6

11. On 03.02.2022, when the matter was taken along with W.P.
(C)   48   of   2022,   learned   Senior   Counsel,   Mr.   Harish   Salve
appearing   for   the   petitioners   submits   that   the   NCLT
proceedings   for   grant   of   final   approval   of   the   proposed
Scheme   ought   to   continue   as   the   culmination   in   the   final
order  would take six  to eight months  for  completing  all the
steps as required  under  the  Companies  Act, 2013.  He  took
us   through   the   written   submissions   filed   on   09.01.2022,
wherein the following stages were listed:
S.No. Process
1 Pronouncement   of   Order   by   NCLT,
Mumbai bench
2 Receipt of admission stage order from
NCLT
3 Dispatch   of   Notice/   addendum   to
Notice
4 Advertisement  of  Notice in  Newspaper
in Form CAA­2 (not less than 30 days
before the date of meeting)
5 Notice   u/s.   230(5)   to   the   regulatory
authorities
6 Filing   of   requisite   documents   with
ROC, RD and OL
7

7 Affidavit   to   be   filed   not   less   than   7
days   before   the   scheduled   date   of
meetings
8
Meetings   of   Shareholders   and
Creditors
1. First date of the Meetings
2. Last date of Meetings
9 Chairman report in Form CAA.4 to be
filed with NCLT
10 Filing   of   Petition   with   NCLT   in   Form
CAA.5   within   7   days   of   Chairman
Report
11 Admission   of   Petition   and
determination   of   date   of   final   hearing
by NCLT
12 Advertisement   in   newspaper   of   final
hearing   of   petition   (not   less   than   10
days before the final hearing)
13 Notice of final hearing also to be given
to   the   regulators/   objectors   from
whom the representation is received
14 Filing of Affidavit confirming service of
notice,   publication   of   advertisement
(at least 3 days before the hearing)
15 Final   hearing   of   petition   by   NCLT   for
approval of the scheme
16 After   hearing,   passing   of   final   order
sanctioning the scheme
8

Mr.   Salve   stated   that   it   would   take   six   to   eight   months   for
completing   all   the   fifteen   steps   set   out   above.   He   finally
submitted   that   it   is   only   when   the   final   Scheme   is
sanctioned by the NCLT that the retail assets of FRL would
get alienated. So long as the final order of sanctioning is not
passed   by   the   NCLT,   Amazon   is   not   prejudiced   in   any
manner. 
12. Mr.   Mukul   Rohatgi,   learned   Senior   Counsel   appearing   on
behalf   of   FCPL   has   submitted   that   the   Competition
Commission of India has revoked initial Amazon­FCPL share
purchase,   which   effectively   nullifies   the   arbitration.   He
submits that these facts have bearing on the continuation of
the proceedings which needs to form a part of consideration.
Accordingly,   he   submits   that   he   is   willing   to   argue   on   the
aforesaid consideration before the High Court in remand. 
13. On   the   contrary,   Mr.   Gopal   Subramanium,   learned   Senior
Counsel   appearing   for   Amazon   submitted   that   up   till   now
FRL   has   conducted   NCLT   proceedings   in   contravention   of
the   order   of   the   Emergency   Arbitrator   as   well   as   the
Enforcement   order   passed   by   the   learned   Single   Judge   of
9

Delhi High Court in OMP (ENF) (Comm) No. 17 of 2021. He
stated   that   the   order   of   this   Court   dated   01.02.2022   has
clearly remanded the matter for reconsideration by the High
Court. If this Court were to grant any ad­interim relief, then
this   Court   would   be   binding   the   High   Court   as   to   the
possible view to be taken thereafter. 
14. Mr.   Aspi   Chinoy,   learned   Senior   Counsel   appearing   for   the
Amazon submits that FRL and FCPL are not entitled for any
interim relief as they have not challenged the initial order of
the Emergency Arbitrator, which is binding on them. Lastly,
Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior counsel appearing for the
Amazon,   submits   that   FRL   has   already   undertaken   to
complete eight out of the fifteen steps listed above.
15. The   aforesaid   submission,   is   also   accepted   by   Mr.   Harish
Salve,   learned   Senior   Counsel   appearing   for   FRL,   that   the
proceedings   before   the   NCLT   have   reached   the   stage   listed
at serial no. 8 (Meeting of the shareholders and creditors) as
indicated   in   the   abovementioned   chart.   He   further
contended   that   it   would   take   6­8   months   to   complete   the
entire process and  for  actual  sanctioning  of  the  Scheme by
10

the   NCLT.   In   this   context,   if   an   order   is   passed,   by   the
Arbitral Tribunal, in favour of FRL, then it will be difficult to
initiate fresh proceedings before NCLT at that stage. It is his
submission that FRL is incurring expenditure everyday and
there is an imminent threat of insolvency. Any delay  in the
proceedings before the NCLT will have serious ramifications
and   virtually   render   the   agreement   between   FRL­Reliance
group   redundant.   Furthermore,   the   livelihood   of   22,000
employees of FRL are also at stake. In the same breath, he
has   submitted   that   continuation   of   the   NCLT   proceedings
will not adversely affect Amazon in any manner.
16. In view of the above submissions, we grant liberty to FRL to
approach   the   High   Court   by   filing   an   application   seeking
continuation   of   the   NCLT   proceedings   beyond  the   8 th
  Stage
(Meeting   of   Shareholders   and   creditors).   Accordingly,   we
request the learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court, to
consider   all   the   contentions   raised   by   both   the   parties   in
this regard and pass appropriate order as to continuation of
the NCLT proceedings beyond the stage mentioned at serial
11

no.   8   and   other   regulatory   approvals   expeditiously,
uninfluenced by any observations made herein.
17. Civil Appeals are disposed of in terms of the aforesaid order.
..........................CJI.
(N. V. RAMANA)
…..........................J.
(A.S. BOPANNA)
............................J.
(HIMA KOHLI)
NEW DELHI;
FEBRUARY 15, 2022
12