wordpress blog stats
Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Delhi HC refuses to interfere in Amazon–Future Retail conflict, says regulators can decide on their own

The Delhi High Court on Monday refused to stop Amazon from pushing regulators to stop the sale of the Future Group’s businesses to Reliance Retail, LiveLaw reported. Justice Mukta Gupta said in a 132-page judgement obtained by LiveLaw (not yet made available on the Delhi High Court’s website) that while it wouldn’t stop the deal from happening, the court wouldn’t interfere with regulators making their own assessment of the legality of Future Retail’s sale. The Emergency Arbitrator’s order that Amazon obtained from Singapore was not repudiated either, putting the ball firmly in the court of regulatory agencies.

The stakes are high for this deal, which is valued at ₹24,713 crore. Each party to the case sent reputed and seasoned litigators to the Delhi High Court, with Gopal Subramanium appearing for Amazon, Harish Salve appearing for Future Retail, Mukul Rohatgi appearing for Future Coupons, and Abhishek Manu Singhvi appearing for Reliance. Amazon argued that it had the right to veto the sale to Reliance due to terms of a contract with Future Coupons, FRL’s promoter entity. Future argued that Amazon, and the emergency arbitration order it had obtained, did not have standing in the Indian legal system, and that Amazon had essentially signed a deal with Future Coupons to sidestep FDI norms, supposedly weakening its claims of a veto.

It’s not clear which side regulatory agencies will eventually decide on; the Competition Commission of India, for its part, went ahead with its approval of the deal last month in spite of Amazon’s objections.

Also read

Advertisement. Scroll to continue reading.
Written By

I cover the digital content ecosystem and telecom for MediaNama.

MediaNama’s mission is to help build a digital ecosystem which is open, fair, global and competitive.



Looking at the definition of health data, it is difficult to verify whether health IDs are covered by the Bill.


The accession to the Convention brings many advantages, but it could complicate the Brazilian stance at the BRICS and UN levels.


In light of the state's emerging digital healthcare apparatus, how does Clause 12 alter the consent and purpose limitation model?


The collective implication of leaving out ‘proportionality’ from Clause 12 is to provide very wide discretionary powers to the state.


The latest draft is also problematic for companies or service providers that have nothing to with children's data.

You May Also Like


Google has released a Google Travel Trends Report which states that branded budget hotel search queries grew 179% year over year (YOY) in India, in...


135 job openings in over 60 companies are listed at our free Digital and Mobile Job Board: If you’re looking for a job, or...


Rajesh Kumar* doesn’t have many enemies in life. But, Uber, for which he drives a cab everyday, is starting to look like one, he...


By Aroon Deep and Aditya Chunduru You’re reading it here first: Twitter has complied with government requests to censor 52 tweets that mostly criticised...

MediaNama is the premier source of information and analysis on Technology Policy in India. More about MediaNama, and contact information, here.

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ

Subscribe to our daily newsletter
Your email address:*
Please enter all required fields Click to hide
Correct invalid entries Click to hide

© 2008-2021 Mixed Bag Media Pvt. Ltd. Developed By PixelVJ