Vivek Sharma Vs Indraprastha Medical Corporation Ltd. (Competition Commission of India)
In , the Competition Commission of India (CCI) examined allegations arising from an information filed under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 against Becton Dickinson India (P) Ltd. and Max Super Specialty Hospital, Patparganj, Delhi. The Informant alleged that disposable syringes sold through the hospital pharmacy carried higher Maximum Retail Prices (MRP) than identical syringes sold in the open market.
Following a prima facie order under Section 26(1), the Director General (DG) investigated the matter. The DG later reported that no exclusive agreement existed between the syringe manufacturer and the hospital and concluded that there was no contravention of Section 3(3) of the Act. The Commission accepted this finding.
However, the DG also examined whether certain super-specialty hospitals in Delhi were abusing their dominant position by compelling in-patients to purchase medicines, consumables, medical devices, and tests only from in-house facilities and by allegedly charging excessive prices. The Commission directed supplementary investigation into the issue of “aftermarket abuse.”
The DG subsequently investigated 12 super-specialty hospitals in Delhi, including Indraprastha Apollo Hospital. The DG defined separate relevant markets for healthcare services provided to in-patients of each hospital and concluded that each hospital was dominant in its own market. The DG found contravention of Section 4 on five parameters: room rent, medical tests, medical devices, consumables, and medicines. According to the DG, hospitals charged higher prices than hotels, diagnostic centres, or procurement costs and earned significant profit margins on various products and services.
