RIL share price fell more than 2% today to trade at Rs 2,087 per share while Future Retail stock tanked 10% to settle at Rs 58.20 apiece after the Supreme Court of India ruled in favour of Amazon – seeking to block a deal between Mukesh Ambani and Kishore Biyani. The apex court said that the order passed by Singapore International Arbitration Centre to stay the Rs 24,731 crore deal between Mukesh Ambani and Kishore Biyani is valid. Future Enterprises and Future Lifestyle were also down 10% each.
Check live price: Reliance Industries; Future Retail; Future Enterprises; Future Lifestyle Fashions; Future Supply Chain; Future Consumer
A single-judge bench of Justice R F Nariman dealt with the matter and held that an award of an EA of a foreign country is enforceable under the Indian Arbitration and Conciliation Act. “The EA Order is an order within section 17 (1) and can be enforced under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,” it said. Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC and FRL are embroiled in a bitter legal fight over the deal and the US-based firm has sought in the apex court that the EA award was valid and enforceable.
Amazon and Future retail have been involved in an intense legal fight over the deal, where the US-based firm was seeking in the apex court that the Singapore’s Emergency Arbitrator (EA) award, which restrained Future Retail from going ahead with the merger planned with Mukesh Ambani’s Reliance Industries. Amazon had earlier told the bench that the Kishore Biyani’s Future Group had negotiated with it to enter into certain agreements and are bound by Singapore’s EA award restraining Future Retail from going ahead with its merger deal with Reliance Retail. Amazon had reiterated that EA’s award was enforceable.
Earlier in February this year, A Delhi High Court division bench had stayed the single-judge direction to Future Retail and various statutory authorities to maintain the status quo on the deal. The interim direction was passed on FRL’s appeal challenging the February 2 order of the single judge which had ruled in favour of the US firm saying that the EA’s award was valid and enforceable.
