NO MORE PENALTY! PENALTY ALREADY IMPOSED FOR SAME PERIOD ASHUTOSH BHARDWAJ VS DLF AND ORS., ORDER DATED 04/01/2017

-Shivam Garg [i] Introduction The case[ii], deals with Abuse of Dominant Position by DLF and its subsidiaries in Residential Real Estate Sector in Gurugram Region. Section 4 of the Competition Act discusses the same, which provides that there shall be an abuse of dominant position “if an enterprise or a group directly or indirectly imposes […]

Rohtas Industries Limited v. S.D. Agarwal & Anr

By- Dhruv Chadha[ii] Introduction The instant case (Rohtas Industries Limited v. S.D. Agarwal & Anr [i]) was one that involved an investigation ordered into Rohtas Industries Ltd. for suspected violations of the Companies Act. One might then ask what relation this case has to competition law! Until quite recently, its relevance lay dormant. However, the […]

RAJKUMAR DYEING AND PRINTING WORKS PRIVATE LIMITED V. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA*

By Sakshi Malhotra 1.      Introduction This case[*] deals with the powers of Competition Commission of India (hereinafter CCI) to punish for the contravention of the order of the Commission under Section 42 of the Competition Act 2002 (hereinafter the Act). Author will analyse the ‘Doctrine of Proportionality’ to judge the reasonability of the order passed by […]

M/S ECP INDUSTRIES LTD V. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA

AnushkaKadiresan[1] Introduction The case deals with Section 27 (b) ofthe Competition Act, 2002 (“the Act”), which empowers the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) to penalize offenders for a contravention of Section 3 (anti-competitive agreements) and Section 4 (abuse of dominant position) of the Act.The penalty under Section 27 has been imposed on multiple enterprises by […]

MDD Medical System v. FCCPA (Appeal No. 93/2012 passed on 25th feb, 2013)

By Atyotma Gupta Introduction The present matter deals with three appeals filed by MDD Medical System India (P) Ltd. (“MDD”), PES Installations Ltd. (“PES”) and Medical Products Services (hereinafter called “MPS”). These appeals against the order passed by the Competition Commission of India (“CCI”) by which all the three appellants were penalized under section 27 of […]

COMPAT can’t intervene CCI investigation: Analysis of CCI v. SAIL, (2010) 10 SCC 744

Shivam Garg[*] Introduction In the landmark judgment of CCI vs. SAIL[1], the apex court held that ― “No appeal can be filed against an order of Competition Commission of India (CCI), directing an investigation into a complaint received by it”.  Thus, this judgment played a prominent role in ensuring the distribution of power of COMPAT […]

Cartelization in supply of spares to Diesel Loco Modernization Works

 Ayushi Mishra[i] Alleged cartelization in matte of supply of spares to Diesel Loco Modernization Works v. M/s Stone India Limited, M/s Faiveley Transport Rail Technologies India Ltd. and M/s Escorts Ltd., 2014 CompLR 170(CCI) Introduction Background of the case The case deals with section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘Act’) which prohibits parties from entering into anti-competitive […]

M/S TRANSPARENT ENERGY SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED V. TECPRO SYSTEMS LIMITED Case No. 09 of 2013

-Anushka Kadiresan[1] Introduction Predatory pricing refers to a practice of driving rivals out of business by selling at a price below the cost of production.[2] In this strategy, the dominant firm first lowers its price to drive out competition from the market. After the competitors are eliminated, the firm can raise the prices and reap […]