SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(SC) 430

R.F.NARIMAN, B.R.GAVAI
Amazon. Com NV Investment Holdings LLC – Appellant
Versus
Future Retail Limited – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s):Gopal Subramanium, Ranjit Kumar, Gourab Banerji, Nakul Dewan, Anand S Pathak, Amit K Mishra, Shashank Gautam, Sreemoyee Deb, Vijay Purohit, Mohit Singh, AOR Harshad Pathak, Promit Chatterjee, Shivam Pandey, Sa idhi Hota, Kanika Singhal, Saloni Agarwal, Didon Misri, Nikita Bangera, Pratik Jhaveri, Faizan Mithaiwala, Vijayendra Pratap Singh, Rachit Bahl, Roopali Singh, Abhijnan Jha, Priyank Ladoia, Tanmay Sharma, Vanya Chhabra, Arnab Ray, Vedant Kapur, Shaurya Mittal, Abhisar Vidyarthi, Ninaee Deshmukh, Pawan Bhushan, Hima Lawrence, Ujwala Uppaluri, Mohit Pandey, Raka Chatterji, Vinay Tripathi, Aishvary Vikram, Kaustubh Prakash, Anushka Shah, Neelu Mohan, Aspi Chinoy, Gourab Banerji, Amit Sibal, Nakul Dewan, Anand S Pathak, Amit K Mishra, Shashank Gautam, Shashank Manish, AOR Sreemoyee Deb, Vijay Purohit, Mohit Singh, S iti Shah, Harshad Pathak, Promit Chatterjee, Shivam Pandey, Sa idhi Hota, Kanika Singhal, Saloni Agarwal, Nidhi Sahay, Didon Misri, Nikita Bangera, Pratik Jhaveri, Faizan Mithaiwala, Vijayendra Pratap Singh, Rachit Bahl, Roopali Singh, Abhijnan Jha, Priyank Ladoia, Tanmay Sharma, Vanya Chhabra, Arnab Ray, Vedant Kapur, Shaurya Mittal, Abhisar Vidyarthi, Ninaee Deshmukh, Pawan Bhushan, Hima Lawrence, Ujwala Uppaluri, Mohit Pandey, Raka Chatterji, Vinay Tripathi, Aishvary Vikram, Kaustubh Prakash, Anushka Shah, Neelu Mohan, Advocates
For the Respondent(s):Harish Salve, KV Vishwanathan, Vineet Naik, Ritin Rai, Ameet Naik, Ameet Naik, Raghav Shankar, Aditya Mehta, Tushar Hathiramani, Abhishek Kale, Madhu Gadodia, Harshvardhan Jha, Arshiya Sharda, Ritika Rai, Apoorv Singhal, Pankaj Patel, Yugandhara Pawar Jha, Iqbal Chagla, Vikram Nankani, Rohan Shah, Mahesh Agarwal, Naval Agarwal, Rishi Agarwala, Karan Luthra, Rohan Kelkar, Pranjit Bhattacharya, Ankit Banati, E. C. Agrawala, Vikas Mehta, Devanshi Singh, Apoorv Khator, Bhaskar Nayak, Advocates

JUDGMENT :

R.F. NARIMAN, J.

1. Two important questions arise in these appeals - first, as to whether an “award” delivered by an Emergency Arbitrator under the Arbitration Rules of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre [“SIAC Rules”] can be said to be an order under Section 17(1) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [“Arbitration Act”] and second, as to whether an order passed under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration Act in enforcement of the award of an Emergency Arbitrator by a learned Single Judge of the High Court is appealable.

2. The brief facts necessary to appreciate the context in which these two questions arise are as follows:

    2.1. Proceedings were initiated by the Appellant, Amazon.com NV Investment Holdings LLC [“Amazon”] before the High Court of Delhi under Section 17(2) of the Arbitration Act to enforce the award/order dated 25th October, 2020 of an Emergency Arbitrator, Mr. V.K. Rajah, SC. This order was passed in arbitration proceedings being SIAC Arbitration No. 960 of 2020 commenced by Amazon against Respondents No. 1 to 13, who are described as under:

    (i) Respondent No. 1 - Future Retail Limited, India’s second-largest offline retailer [“FRL”].

    (ii) Re


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top