Corporate Law : Explore the Competition Commission of India’s merger remedies, including structural, behavioral, and hybrid solutions, to addres...
Corporate Law : CCI penalizes Maruti Suzuki ₹200 crore for restricting dealer discounts under anti-competitive policies. Case highlights include...
Corporate Law : CCI finds no evidence of PVR's alleged abuse of dominance in film exhibition. Claims lacked support, validating PVR's business str...
Corporate Law : CCI fined Maruti Suzuki for restricting dealer discounts, impacting competition and consumer welfare in the Indian automotive mar...
Goods and Services Tax : CCI mandates passing on GST rate cuts to consumers, directing Cinema Ventures to deposit Rs. 54.44 lakh in the Consumer Welfare Fu...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission of India seeks public feedback on the draft Cost of Production Regulations 2025, replacing the 2009 rul...
Corporate Law : CCI's directive restricting WhatsApp data sharing for ads faces an interim stay by NCLAT. Government awaits legal resolution on da...
Corporate Law : CCI seeks stakeholder comments on proposed amendments to the 2011 Penalty Recovery Regulations, aiming to streamline penalty recov...
Corporate Law : Explore proposed amendments to the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009, analyzing their impact and implica...
Corporate Law : Explore the proposed amendments to Regulations 35, 37, and 50 of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations 2009. L...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission of India rejected Moses Pinto’s complaint against Victor Hospital, ruling no violation of Sections 3 ...
Corporate Law : CCI rejects claims of anti-competitive conduct by Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti and RailTel in PM SHRI scheme tender, citing lack of e...
Corporate Law : The CCI finds no evidence of bid rigging in Aegis Logistics' tender process. Read the details of the case and judicial precedents ...
Corporate Law : CCI rejects allegations that Microsoft abused its dominant position in Windows OS market to favor its Defender antivirus, finding ...
Corporate Law : CCI rejects claims of collusion in Pradhan Mantri Vishwakarma Yojana toolkit tenders, citing lack of evidence against Pragyawan & ...
Corporate Law : The Competition Commission of India (CCI) notifies new regulations for recovering monetary penalties, detailing procedures for dem...
Corporate Law : CCI penalizes Meta ₹213.14 crore for abusing dominance through WhatsApp's 2021 Privacy Policy update. Cease-and-desist orders an...
Corporate Law : Explore the amendments to the Competition Commission of India (CCI) regulations in 2024, enhancing transparency and procedures. Un...
Corporate Law : Discover the Competition Commission of Indias in-depth study on AI's impact on competition, efficiency, and innovation. Get insigh...
Corporate Law : Competition Commission of India announces new regulations and penalty guidelines to streamline competition law enforcement. Read m...
By no stretch of imagination, Lakme can be considered as dominant either in the geographical market of Delhi or of Gurgaon. There are innumerable branded and non-branded saloons exclusively for women in Delhi alone looking at the population of Delhi being 1.26 crore and the same is the situation with regard to the number of exclusive saloons for women within district Gurgaon which covers a large area within it.In view of the presence of such a large number of beauty saloons exclusively for women in these areas having 7 saloons or so would not give a dominant status to Lakme under any circumstance. Thus, the question of abuse of dominance by Lakme would not arise.
On a plain reading of the aforesaid circulars/letters, it is evident that the opposite party associations through these circulars/letters tried to limit/control the supply of the film in contravention of the provision of section 3 (1) read with section 3(3)(b) of the Act. By virtue of the provisions contained in section 3(3) of the Act, any agreement entered into between enterprises or associations of enterprises or persons or associations of persons or between any person and enterprise or practice carried on, or decision taken by, any association of enterprises or association of persons, including cartels, engaged in identical or similar trade of goods or provision of services, which (a) directly or indirectly determines purchase or sale prices;
In so far as the specific instances of the abuse of agreement in question are concerned, it is obvious that there has been a settlement between the original complainant and the respondents. Because the complainant does not have any more complaint/grievance of any boycott or the compulsory undertakings which he is to give under the authority of either FMC or FDC so that question will clearly be foreign to the present enquiry.
The role and functioning of BCCI have already been examined in detail earlier in this order. An analysis of the position clearly brings out that there is an overlap between the way BCCI is discharging its regulatory and commercial roles respectively, and the modus operandi/decision making process does not clearly separate the two roles.
There was nothing to show that unfair pricing was done by Microsoft in selling identical licence at different prices. No evidence was brought. The respondent was not tying its OEM with new computers. The purchase of personal computer has the choice to have the programme of Microsoft Office or Words getting installed in its computer if he so chooses. This cannot be, therefore, an example of tying up. There was no compulsion on the appellant to purchase Microsoft software to purchase the computers only as the OEM licensee was free to sell their product, i.e., personal computer even without the warranty that would clearly end the argument about the tying up.
Considering the Section and its language plainly, it is apparent that the agreement to allow concessions and benefits including allowances, discounts, rebates or credit have to have a nexus with the dealings of the respondent. The said dealings would not cover a uniform policy by the respondent to sell its product. We agree with Shri Makheeja when he says that if there is a discrimination between authorized dealers inter se, it would amount to a restrictive trade practice but in that case, it will be that the dealing of the respondent with a particular dealer was discriminatory in comparison to its dealing with another dealer. Such is not the case here.
Director General had concluded on the basis of his investigation that it was not proved that foreign airlines hold about 90% market share in the relevant market of international flying to and fro from India. The appellant was unable to give any specific statistics before the CCI or even before us. On the other hand, from the documents on record
As per the information available in public domain, it is clear that the OP was not the only real estate developer offering commercial office space in Delhi. There are other real estate developers as well, e.g., Ansal API, Unitech, BPTP, Omaxe, Parsavnath etc.Presence of other real estate developers offering commercial office space also indicates that the informant was not dependent upon the opposite party for provisioning of an office space.
By the statutory provision, the legislature has authorized the Central Government to classify and revise rates/freight with respect to carriage of passenger and goods. The impugned rate instructions/circulars issued by OP were uniformly applicable for all the entities who wanted to avail the services of Indian railways for transporting their goods.
Section 12B was introduced in the MRTP Act by Act 30 of the 1984 as an independent remedy for a claimant in addition to a suit that he may file to claim any loss or damage that he may suffer by reason of any monopolistic or restrictive or unfair trade practice as would be clear from sub-section (4) of section 12B. There is no reference at all in section 12B of the MRTP Act to the provisions of either section 10
