After a long series of defeats in the ongoing battle between Amazon and Reliance Retail over its acquisition of Future Group, the American e-commerce firm has finally bagged a massive win. Delhi High Court has ruled that the interim order issued by Singapore court is in fact enforceable in India, asking all parties to maintain status quo for the moment.

This comes after Amazon appealed to the Delhi HC that the Future Group’s deal with Reliance goes against the contracts it signed during its own acquisition of Future Coupons (a subsidiary of Future Group). In fact, Amazon was able to convince Singapore’s Emergency Arbitrator (EA) of the same, which passed an interim order to stay the deal.

However, both Reliance and Future Group declared that the order was not enforceable in India, and thus, they would go through with the deal anyway.

Earlier, Future Group had urged Delhi High Court to stop Amazon from writing to authorities, a plea that was denied.

By now, the deal had been sanctioned by not just the SEBI and the Competition Commission of India (CCI) but also by stock exchanges in the country. That is when Amazon moved to get the deal suspended immediately by the Delhi High Court.

Today, the court has sided with Amazon, claiming that an interim order needed to be passed to protect the rights of Amazon.

“Respondents (FRL) are directed to maintain status quo as on today at 4:49 PM till pronouncement of the reserved order,” the judge said.

Court also added that the order from Singapore court is enforceable in India, even though Future Group denies any wrong doing in its violation.

However, Amazon does not believe that, and claims that Future Group, Kishore Biyani and other promoters and directors have “deliberately and maliciously disobeyed” the EA award despite it being binding on them and not having challenged it in accordance with the law.

Now, according to the judgement, a three member panel need to be set up in 90 days, with one judge being appointed by each Amazon and Future Retail, along with a third neutral judge.