Mahyco Monsanto Biotech (India) Private Ltd & Anr. Vs.competition Commission of India & Ors

Decided On : Dec-18-2018

Court : Delhi

LAW: Section 48, the Companies Act, Section 48, Section 48 of the 2002 Act, the Scheme of Act, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, Chapter VI of the 2002 Act, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, Section 2(h, Page 5, Section 48, Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, the NI Act, the NI Act, the NI Act, Section 48, Section 27, Section 48 of the 2002 Act, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, Section 27 of the Act, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, Section 27, Section 27, Section 48, Section 27 of the 2002 Act, Chapter VI of the 2002, Section 48, Section 48, Page 11, Section 48, Page 12, the Negotiable Instruments Act, Section 141, Section 34, Page 13, Section 48, Section 42 to 44, the Competition Act, Section 3 and 4, the Competition Act, Section 48, Section 3 and 4, the Competition Act, Section 27, Section 48 of the Competition Act, the Competition Act, Section 48, the Competition Act, Page 15, Section 48 of the Competition Act, the Competition Act, the Competition Act, Section 3 and 4, Section 27, Page 16, the Competition Act, Section 48, Section 3 or 4, the Competition Act, Section 27, the Competition Act, Section 48, the Competition Act, Page 17, Section 3 and 4, Section 48, Chapter VI of the Competition Act, Chapter VI, Section 48, Page 18, Section 48, the Competition Act, Section 27, Section 2(h, Section 2(I)(iii, the Competition Act, Section 48, Page 19 of, Section 48 of the Competition Act, Page 21, the Competition Act, Section 48”.27, the Competition Act, Page 24, Section 138, the N.I. Act, Section 48, Page 27, the Competition Act, Section 138, the N.I. Act, Page 28, Section 48 of the Competition Act LPA6372018, Page 29, Section 27, Section 48 of the Competition Act, Section 27 of Competition Act, Section 27 of the Act, Page 30, Section 138 of NI Act, section 3 or section 4, Page 31, section 4, Page 32, section 39, section 36, Page 33, section 6, Page 34, Section 27 of the Act, Section 3 or Section 4, Section 27(b, Page 35, the Competition Act, Page 36, Page 37, Page 38, Page 39, Section 48, Chapter VI, Section 46, Chapter VI, Section 3, Section 48, the NI Act, Page 41, Page 42

DATE: November 19, 2018, December 18, 2018 + LPA6372018 & CM, 47926/2018, 47927/2018, 48742/2018, 48743/2018, R-3, 12th October, 2018, 7583/2016, 7578/2016, 12th September, 2018, 2016, 2005, 2002, 2002, 2002, 42, 1881, 2014, 42, 2010, 1992, 19th November, 2018, 2001, 1999, 1981, 1940, 2002, 42, 2008, 13 SCC70, 1881, 1954, 1940, 22534/2016.16, the last 3 preceding years, 42, 42, the last nearly three years, February 2016, No.2 28, 52 to 54, 42, 2014, 6259/ 2014, 6669/ 2014, 42, 1881, 26/07/2016, 2008, 42, 1992, 2008, 13 SCC70, 54, 1970, 1984, 58, 42, 6259/2014, 6669/ 2014, February 26, 2015, 1881, 31, No.3 32, 42, 42, 44, each year, each year, 2007, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A, each day, three years, 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 2)of section 41, each day, 34, 2007, 1979, 42, 47926/2018, 47927/2018, 48742/2018, 48743/2018, 2018

PERSON: P.V. Kapur, Ajit Warrier, Rajshekhar Rao, Aditya Nayyar, Angad Kochhar, Aman Singh Sethi, Vaibhav Aggarwal, Yashika Maheshhwari, Siddhant Kapur, Samar Bansal, Manan Shishodia, Gauri Puri, Vinayak Mehrotra, Sunil J.Mathews, Jayant K. Bhushan, Amitabh Kumar, Vaibhav Choukse, Akansha Mehta, Aditya Gupta, Sabah Iqbal Siddiqui, Ajit Warrier, Angad Kochhar, Aditya Nayyar, Samar Bansal, Devahuti Pathak, Manan Shishodia, Amitabh Kumar, Vaibhav Choukse, Akansha Mehta, JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO JUDGMENT V. KAMESWAR RAO, Bench, P.V. Kapur, Rajshekhar Rao, Bench, Bench, Bench, Anr, V. State, Anr, Reasons, Nandan Aggarwal, Supp, Kishan Prakash Sharma, SCC70010, Bangalore, Bench, Aneeta Hada v. M/s., Jayant K. Bhushan, Directors, Bhushan, B. Unnikrishnan, DG, Kumar Ghosh, Arabinda Ghosh AIR1952SC369on, Bhushan, Bhushan, Bhushan, Samar Bansal, Bhushan, Chandhiok, Ramji Srinivasan, Aneeta Hada, Ramji Srinivasan, Shailendra Swarup, Sushila Devi, Aneeta Hada, Aneeta Hada, Aneeta Hada, Madras, C.V. Parekh, Aneeta Hada, Kapur, Rao, Aneeta Hada, Aneeta Hada, CCI, Chandhiok, Ramji Srinivasan, Aneeta Hada, Ramji Srinivasan, Aneeta Hada, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Bhushan, Bansal, Bhushan, Bansal, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, V. Anil Kumar, Laxmi Narain Dhut, Frankfurter, Columbia Law Reports, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Kapur, Rao, Anr, Bench, the M. Nizamudeen, Nandan Aggarwal, B. Unnikrishnan, B. R. Enterprises, V. KAMESWAR RAO

ORG: Adv, R-1/CCI, Advs, Adv, R-4, Adv, Page 1, Advs, W.P., Court, Cadila Healthcare Ltd., Anr, V. Competition Commission of India, LPA No.160/2018, Page 2, Sr. Counsel, Cadila, Court, the Competition Commission of India, Ministry of Agriculture v. M/s. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech Limited, Cadila, the Supreme Court, State of, Uttar Pradesh and Ors, Cadila, CCI, Ministry of Agriculture, CM, Cadila, CM, Bench, the Supreme Court, Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community, the Division Bench, Cadila, the Division Bench, Page 4, Cadila, the Directors / Officers, Sections, Court, the Division Bench, Cadila, Bench, the Supreme Court, Dawoodi Bohra, Division Bench, Cadila, Cadila (Supra, the Division Bench, the Statement of Objects, Shah and Co., Anr., Connected, Officers / Directors, CCI, Directors / LPA6372018, Page 7, The Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Chemplast Sanmar Limited, the Supreme Court, Court, the Supreme Court, Union of India, LPA6372018, Officers / Directors, V. Union of India and Ors, B.R. Enterprises v. State, U.P., Ors, Rajasthan Pharmaceutical Laboratory, Page 10, the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, Paragraph 7, LPA6372018, Cadila, Bench, the Supreme Court, Tours Private Limited, Nos.3, the Competition Commission, LPA6372018, Court, Cadila (Supra, Court, Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, Appellants, the Supreme Court, Court, LPA6372018, Court, CCI, W.P., Cadila, Ors, W.P., LPA6372018, Page 14, Company, Section, Reliance, the Supreme Court, Ors, the Supreme Court, Rajasthan Pharmaceutical Laboratory, Excel Crop Care Limited (Supra, the Supreme Court, LPA6372018, Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, Cadila, Bench, Competition Commission’s, the Court LPA6372018, Cadila, Court, the Cadila (Supra, the Competition Commission, Court, Monsanto, Court, the CCI LPA6372018, Cadila, the Division Bench, Ministry of Agriculture v. M/s. Mahyco Monsanto Biotech Limited, the Directors / Persons, Company, Company, Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, Company, Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, Ministry of Agriculture, Court, the Division Bench, Cadila, Cadila, Ministry of Agriculture, Cadila, Sections 3 and 4, the Division Bench, Cadila, Cadila, Cadila, Cadila, Competition Commission of India, the Supreme Court, Ministry of Agriculture v M/s, Mahyco Monsanto Biotech Ltd, Enforcement Directorate, Securities and Exchange Board of India, LPA6372018, Page 25, Sections 24, the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, M/s, State, Sheoratan Agarwal, State of Madhya Pradesh, C.V. Parekh, Court, LPA6372018, Ministry of Agriculture v M/s, Mahyco Monsanto Biotech Ltd, Cadila, Cadila, Company, the Division Bench, Writ Petitions No.6258/2014, Court, the Supreme Court, Court, LPA6372018, Court, the Officers / Directors, Company, Officers / Directors, Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, CCI, Officers / Directors, Cadila, LPA6372018, Sections 27, Commission, Commission, Commission, LPA6372018, Commission, Commission, Commission, Commission, Commission, Commission, LPA6372018, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Commission, Commission, the Appellate Tribunal, Commission, Commission, Commission.].43, Commission, Commission, Commission, Commission, Commission, Officers / Directors, Sections 3 and 4, Company, Sections 3 and 4, Officers / Directors, LPA6372018, Officers / Directors, Sections 3 and 4, The Supreme Court, State of Bihar & Ors, National Insurance Co. Ltd., Legislature, Legislature, Court, Legislature, Legislature, LPA6372018, State, Legislature, Tata Iron & Steel Co. & Anr, Court, Courts, U.S. Supreme Court, the Supreme Court, Board of Muslim Wakfs Rajasthan v. Radha Krishna & ors, English Oxford Living Dictionary, Officers / Directors, Company, Sections 3 and 4, Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community, Shah and Co., NI, Union of India, Court, Suffice

FAC: R-2, CCI, the Competition Act.20

CARDINAL: R6, 5, J1, 42 2, 3, 3, 42, 2, 42, two, two, 6, 42, 9, 42, more than one, 8, 4, two, 1, 9, 42, 5, 9, 1, three, 4 to 6, 5, 42 Company, two, two, 42, 52 to 55, 42, 3, 42, 17, 6, 42, 42, one, 20, 42, two, two, 42, 25, two, 22, 42, No.4, 42 to 44, two, 1, 23, 2, 1, 6, two, two, 162, 346, 1, 1, one, 3, 4, two, 26, 29, three, 42, 30, 6, two, two, 42, more than one, two, 48, three, 42, up to three, 45[order, 3, 1, 2, one, ten, 3, 42, 2, twenty-five, 2, 4, one, one, 42 43A, fifty, one, 2, 1, 42, No.2, three, 48, 48, 4, 68, more than one, 42, 47, 527, 42, 2, 42, 42 to 44, one, 40, 42, more than one, 42

LOC: Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single, Single Judge

GPE: Single, Poonam, LPA6372018, Bombay, Karnataka, LPA3712018, Pran Mehra, Aswini, LPA6372018, CCI, Pran Mehra, D.G.I., Del., Del., Pran Mehra, Pran Mehra v., D.G.I., Delhi, Delhi, Commission.48, Company.35, penalty.36, Legislatures, Poonam, LPA6372018, Bombay, eschewed.46

PRODUCT: LPA6372018, Page 9, LPA6372018, LPA6372018, No.1, LPA6372018, LPA6372018

NORP: Maharashtra, Maharashtra, Statute

EVENT: the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, the 2002 Act, CCI, CCI, CCI, CCI, CCI, CCI, N.I. Act, N.I. Act, the 2002 Act

PERCENT: 10%, more than ten percent, ten percent, one percent, 10%

ORDINAL: first, second, third, first, first, first, first, first

WORK_OF_ART: The Scheme of Competition Act

MONEY: 42 Competition Act