No Abuse of Dominance Found Since Hospital Pricing Was Not Proven Excessive or Unfair: CCI

Vivek Sharma Vs Stephen’s Hospital (Competition Commission of India)

The matter originated from information filed under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging that Becton Dickinson India Pvt. Ltd. and Max Super Specialty Hospital, Patparganj had colluded to print higher Maximum Retail Prices (MRP) on disposable syringes sold at the hospital pharmacy compared to those sold in the open market.

After a preliminary conference, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) formed a prima facie opinion that there existed a case under Section 4 of the Act and directed investigation by the Director General (DG).

The DG initially found no evidence supporting allegations of collusion between Becton Dickinson and Max Patparganj regarding higher MRP printing on syringes. It was noted that there was no exclusive agreement between them for supply of disposable syringes. Accordingly, the Commission confirmed that there was no contravention of Section 3(3) of the Act.

However, the DG found that Max Patparganj was allegedly abusing its dominant position in the market for healthcare services provided by private super-specialty hospitals. The DG observed that the hospital earned significant margins on syringes and allegedly compelled in-patients to purchase products only from its in-house pharmacy. The Commission therefore directed supplementary investigation into possible “aftermarket abuse” by super-specialty hospitals.