{"id":221570,"date":"2019-10-30T14:30:29","date_gmt":"2019-10-30T09:00:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=221570"},"modified":"2019-12-27T17:18:00","modified_gmt":"2019-12-27T11:48:00","slug":"cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/","title":{"rendered":"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Competition Commission of India (CCI):\u00a0<\/strong>The Bench comprising of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma (Member) and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Member), decided that no competition issues are made out in the present matter under Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">In the present matter, Informant filed the information against Pernod Ricard India Private Limited with respect to the contravention of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 under Section 19(1)(a) of the Act.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Facts\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Pernod Ricard India Private Limited (OP)is engaged in the manufacturing, sale and distribution of various alcoholic products in India. Vyn Marketing through its proprietor, i.e. Informant has been a service provider for OP and for the same Informant and OP entered into an agreement whereunder, the former was required to assist the latter in ascertaining the demand-supply position of various alcoholic brands of the OP and to procure orders from distributors\/wholesalers.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Informant alleged that OP abruptly and without assigning any reasons, terminated the agreement, despite due discharge\u00a0of obligations under the Agreement by Vyn\u00a0Marketing. Such termination was done without providing the 90 days&#8217; notice as required under Clause 21 of the Agreement. Further, adding to the said allegation, OP submitted that after the termination of the Agreement, OP entered into a new agreement with ZK Marketing and thereby appointed it as its new service provider.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">It has been alleged that ZK Marketing has no knowledge\/experience\u00a0in the relevant field. The informant stated that such an appointment was done by the OP only with the motive to gain an unfair advantage as it would be able to receive kickbacks from ZK Marketing\u00a0<em>in lieu\u00a0<\/em>of dealership. The said allegation\u00a0is said to be an\u00a0<strong>anti-competitive\u00a0agreement\u00a0<\/strong>between OP and ZK Marketing.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Informant alleged that OP abused its dominant position in violation of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act. The abrupt termination of the Agreement by the OP and subsequent appointment of an agency that has political connections but no relevant experience pieces of evidence such abuse by the OP.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Conclusion<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Commission on perusal of the information noted the main grievance of the <strong>alleged unilateral termination by the OP of the Agreement and the subsequent appointment of ZK Marketing in its place.<\/strong><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Allegations against the OP essentially pertain to<\/strong> termination of the Agreement without giving 90 days advance notice as per the Agreement, the appointment of ZK Marketing as a service provider by the OP in place of the Informant, due to ZK Marketing having political influence,<em> etc.<\/em><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><strong>Informant pertains to the appointment of ZK Marketing\u00a0<\/strong>as its new service provider mainly due to its political and bureaucratic connections, alleged\u00a0<em>quid pro quo,\u00a0<\/em>corruption in the government department, violation of french law and Code of conduct by the OP, etc.<\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\">Thus, Commission is of the view that no case of contravention of either Sections 3 and 4 of the Act is made out against the OP in the present matter. [Ashok Suchde v. Pernod Ricard (India) (P) Ltd., <a href=\"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/DocumentLink\/CT1qRa8b\"><b>2019 SCC OnLine CCI 35<\/b><\/a>, decided on 16-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Competition Commission of India (CCI):\u00a0The Bench comprising of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma (Member) and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Member), decided <\/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":[30570,38090,38089,38091],"class_list":["post-221570","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-tribunals_commissions_regulatorybodies","tag-anti-competitive-agreement","tag-competition-issues","tag-quid-pro-quo-allegations","tag-unilateral-termination"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v26.4 (Yoast SEO v26.4) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption | 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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Competition Commission of India (CCI):\u00a0The Bench comprising of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma (Member) and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Member), decided\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/\" \/>\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=\"2019-10-30T09:00:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-12-27T11:48:00+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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/\",\"name\":\"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-30T09:00:29+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-12-27T11:48:00+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption\"}]},{\"@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":"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption | 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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption","og_description":"Competition Commission of India (CCI):\u00a0The Bench comprising of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma (Member) and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Member), decided","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-10-30T09:00:29+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-12-27T11:48:00+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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/","name":"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/10\/Competition-Commission.jpg","datePublished":"2019-10-30T09:00:29+00:00","dateModified":"2019-12-27T11:48:00+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#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\/2019\/10\/30\/cci-no-contravention-of-ss-3-or-4-of-competition-act-found-on-allegations-of-quid-pro-quo-and-corruption\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"CCI | No contravention of Ss. 3 or 4 of Competition Act found on allegations of quid pro quo and corruption"}]},{"@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":200450,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/21\/cci-dismisses-the-allegation-of-anti-competitive-practice-against-timex-group\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":0},"title":"CCI dismisses the allegation of \u2018anti-competitive\u2019 practice against Timex Group","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 21, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The Bench comprising of Sudhir Mital, Chairperson and Augustine Peter, U.C. Nahta and G.P. Mittal, Members, while addressing information being filed under Section 19(1)(a) for contravention of provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002, found no prima facie case made out.\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":205001,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/11\/12\/meeting-of-minds-a-sine-qua-non-for-contravention-of-section-3-of-competition-act-no-merit-in-case-against-ola-uber-cci\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":1},"title":"\u201cMeeting of minds\u201d a sine qua non for contravention of Section 3 of Competition Act; no merit in case against Ola, Uber: CCI","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 12, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The Bench comprising of Sudhir Mital (Chairperson) and Augustine Peter and U.C. Nahta (Members), closed a matter under Section 26 (2) of the Competition Act, 2002 against the OPs: Ola; Uber; Uber B.V., Amsterdam, Netherlands; and Uber Technologies Inc., San Francisco, USA for alleged contravention\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":196837,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/06\/11\/bmw-india-not-being-a-dominant-player-did-not-contravene-section-4-of-the-competition-act-2002-cci\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":2},"title":"BMW India not being a \u2018Dominant player\u2019 did not contravene Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002: CCI","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"June 11, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The four-member bench comprising of Devender Kumar Sikri, Chairperson and Sudhir Mital, U.C. Nahta, and G.P. Mittal, Members, ordered closure of the matter filed against BMW India Private Limited (OP-1) under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging \u2018abuse of dominance\u2019. The brief facts\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":200633,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/08\/25\/agreement-between-consumer-and-service-provider-does-not-qualify-as-agreement-contemplated-under-section-33-of-competition-act-cci\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":3},"title":"Agreement between consumer and service provider does not qualify as \u2018agreement\u2019 contemplated under Section 3(3) of Competition Act: CCI","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"August 25, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India(CCI): A four-member bench comprising of Sudhir Mital, Chairperson and Augustine Peter, U.C. Nahata and Justice G.P. Mittal, Members closed a matter filed under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 against the U.P. Housing and Development Board (Opposite Party). The informant was allotted one LIG flat\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":246456,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/03\/abuse-of-dominance\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":4},"title":"[Monopoly] CCI | State of Uttarakhand created monopolies by canalising liquor procurement || Detailed Order on Abuse of dominance by Uttarakhand Agricultural Produce Marketing Board denying market access to others","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 3, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Competition Commission of India (CCI): The Coram of Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson) and Sangeeta Verma and Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi, (Members) expressed that: State of Uttarakhand formulated the Liquor Wholesale Order in a manner through which State officials were vested with exclusive powers which included discretion to dictate as to what\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","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":365818,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/11\/06\/nclat-on-ccis-power-to-examine-patented-products-dispute\/","url_meta":{"origin":221570,"position":5},"title":"CCI lacks power to examine dispute over patented products: NCLAT dismisses appeal against Vifor International","author":"Shikha","date":"November 6, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"In the present case, the issue was whether CCI has power to examine the case, where the subject matter was protected by the Patent Act. The Tribunal observed that Section 3(5) of the Competition Act, 2002 states that the Competition Act will not restrict the right of any person in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Case Briefs&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"CCI\u2019s power to examine patented products dispute","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/CCIs-power-to-examine-patented-products-dispute.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/CCIs-power-to-examine-patented-products-dispute.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/CCIs-power-to-examine-patented-products-dispute.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/11\/CCIs-power-to-examine-patented-products-dispute.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221570","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=221570"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/221570\/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=221570"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=221570"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=221570"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}