{"id":196822,"date":"2018-06-11T12:01:46","date_gmt":"2018-06-11T06:31:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=196822"},"modified":"2018-08-18T17:54:03","modified_gmt":"2018-08-18T12:24:03","slug":"not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/","title":{"rendered":"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct"},"content":{"rendered":"

Competition Commission of India: <\/strong>A four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, Augustine Peter and U.C. Nahata, Members, ordered the matter filed under Section 19(1)(a) of Competition Act 2002, to be closed forthwith holding that no case of contravention of provisions of the Act was made out against the makers of the movies \u2018Padmavat<\/em>\u2019 and \u2018Padman<\/em>\u2019 (opposite parties).<\/p>\n

The informants alleged that the opposite parties (OPs) had violated Section 3(3) of the Act. The informants were primarily aggrieved by the fact that the OPs, makers of the above named two movies, colluded to share the market by scheduling different dates\/time frames for releasing their respective movies, resulting in controlling the supply of movies in the market. It was informed to the Commission that in a joint press conference, makers of the movie \u2018Padman<\/em>\u2019 announced the postponing of the release date of their movie on request of makers of the movie \u2018Padmavat<\/em>\u2019. As per the informants, sharing and allocation of time frame for movie release was a collusion between filmmakers that fell within the ambit of Section 3(3)(c) of the Act, and thus impermissible.<\/p>\n

After perusing the information and noting the facts, the Commission observed that releasing of a movie is a strategic and tactical business decision taken by the producers. In the instant matter, the release of \u2018Padmavat<\/em>\u2019 was delayed due to severe protests by a certain section of the society, and not by collusion with any other party. Moreover, the decision of not releasing both the movies at the same date was taken due to non-availability of a sufficient number of screens, which would have caused loss to producers of both the movies. The CCI held that such decision, being a result of market outcome, was a legitimate business decision rather than an anti-competitive practice. In absence of any evidence regarding a concerted action by the OPs, the CCI held that the anti- competitive conduct alleged against them was not established. The matter was accordingly directed to be closed forthwith. [Kshitiz Arya v.\u00a0 Viacom 18 Media (P) Ltd.,2018 SCC OnLine CCI 41<\/b><\/a>, dated 01.06.2018]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Competition Commission of India: A four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, Augustine Peter and U.C. Nahata, Members, <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":76441,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,11],"tags":[25114,30348,30419,30420,28234],"class_list":["post-196822","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-anti-competitive","tag-collusion","tag-mega-budget","tag-padman","tag-padmavat"],"yoast_head":"\nNot releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Competition Commission of India: A four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, Augustine Peter and U.C. Nahata, Members,\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-06-11T06:31:46+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-08-18T12:24:03+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1329\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"888\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/\",\"name\":\"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-06-11T06:31:46+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-08-18T12:24:03+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"width\":1329,\"height\":888},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct","og_description":"Competition Commission of India: A four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, Augustine Peter and U.C. Nahata, Members,","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-06-11T06:31:46+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-08-18T12:24:03+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1329,"height":888,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/","name":"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","datePublished":"2018-06-11T06:31:46+00:00","dateModified":"2018-08-18T12:24:03+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","width":1329,"height":888},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/not-releasing-mega-budget-movies-in-competition-with-another-movie-is-not-an-anti-competitive-conduct\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Not releasing mega-budget movies in competition with another movie is not an anti-competitive conduct"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":156354,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/09\/14\/in-order-to-prove-abusive-conduct-under-s-4-of-competition-act-complainant-has-to-establish-dominant-position-of-opposite-party-in-the-relevant-market\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":0},"title":"In order to prove abusive conduct under S. 4 of Competition Act, complainant has to establish dominant position of opposite party in the relevant market","author":"Saba","date":"September 14, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India: The Commission recently passed an order under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002 wherein it held that for proving alleged abusive conduct under Section 4 of the Competition Act, on part of the opposite party, a prima facie case would need to exist wherein it\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6679,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/06\/24\/kerala-s-cinema-trade-associations-and-their-office-bearers-are-penalized-for-cartelization\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":1},"title":"Kerala\u2019s Cinema Trade Associations and their Office Bearers penalized for Cartelization","author":"Sucheta","date":"June 24, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): In the series of its orders against trade unions\/associations for anti-competitive agreements, the CCI yesterday found the arrangement relating to distribution of films for releasing between the Opposite Parties (Ops) namely, Kerala Film Exhibitors Federation (OP1), Kerala Film Distributors Association (OP2), and Kerala Film Producers\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies"","block_context":{"text":"Tribunals\/Commissions\/Regulatory Bodies","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2015\/10\/scc-blog_Page_9.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":232680,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/07\/22\/cci-msmes-indulging-in-cartelization-in-the-composite-brake-blocks-cbb-market-in-india-cautioned-to-refrain-from-indulging-in-such-malpractices-in-future\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":2},"title":"CCI | MSMEs indulging in cartelization in the Composite Brake Blocks (CBB) market in India, cautioned to refrain from indulging in such malpractices in future","author":"Editor","date":"July 22, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): While deciding the instant matter which revolved around violation of Section 3 (3) of the Competition Act, 2002 in the tenders floated by the various divisions\/ zones of the Indian Railways (including the Informants) and other procuring entities for procuring of different types of Composite\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":67191,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/09\/07\/allegations-of-predatory-pricing-against-ola-and-taxi-for-sure-dismissed\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":3},"title":"Allegations of Predatory Pricing against Ola and Taxi for Sure, dismissed","author":"Sucheta","date":"September 7, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India: While dealing with case relating to predatory pricing allegations against ANI Technologies Private Limited (Opposite Parties), the Commission held that no case could be made out against the ANI Technologies Pvt. Ltd. under the provisions of Section 4 of the Competition Commission Act, 2002. In the\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/OLa.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/OLa.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/OLa.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/OLa.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/OLa.png?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":250232,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/06\/23\/google\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":4},"title":"CCI | Did Google leverage dominance in Play Store? Director General to conduct investigation in complaint by smart phone\/smart TV users","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 23, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): Coram of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Members) ordered an investigation by the Director-General against Google in view of prima facie contravention of provisions of Competition Act. Informants filed the instant case under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":197217,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/19\/existence-of-an-agreement-is-a-sine-qua-non-to-prove-contravention-of-section-3-of-competition-act-2002\/","url_meta":{"origin":196822,"position":5},"title":"Existence of an \u2018agreement\u2019 is a sine qua non to prove contravention of Section 3 of Competition Act, 2002","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 19, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): A four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahata and G.P. Mittal, Members, directed closure of the matter alleging contravention of provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act 2002, by the Opposite Party 1 (OP 1)- Panchsheel\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196822","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=196822"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/196822\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/76441"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=196822"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=196822"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=196822"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}