Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: competition act 2002 section 15 · Page 1 of about 2,358 results (0.060 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

Apr 20 2015

Union of India Through Executive Engineer, Mumbai Central Division No. ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Apr-20-2015

Subject : Arbitration

dominant position and thus question of applicability of provisions of the said Competition Act, 2002 did not arise. 15. Learned counsel also invited my attention to the findings of the learned arbitrator that Income Tax Department had … provided otherwise was a clear abuse of dominant position. The respondent placed reliance on Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 in support of this contention. In the said letter, the respondent alleged that the respondent had always shown

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 01 2013

M/S Oracle Drugs and Others Vs. Secretary, Department of Health and Fa ...

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Decided on : Jul-01-2013

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 29 2019

Shri Jose C. Mundadan vs.state & Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-29-2019

Subject : Land Acquisition

a statutory body established by the Central Government in exercise of its power under Section 7 of the Competition Act, 2002 (“the Competition Act”, for short), the respondent herein, has instituted, through its authorized representative, criminal complaints against the … ―and‖. As we have noted earlier in Vimla AIR1963SC1572it was held that the term Crl.M.C. 4363/2018 etc. Page 15 of 24 ―fraudulently‖ is wider than the term ―dishonestly‖ which however, requires a wrongful gain and a wrongful

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Mar 29 2019

M/S Rajasthan Cylinders & Containers Ltd vs.competition Commission ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-29-2019

Subject : Land Acquisition

a statutory body established by the Central Government in exercise of its power under Section 7 of the Competition Act, 2002 (“the Competition Act”, for short), the respondent herein, has instituted, through its authorized representative, criminal complaints against the … ―and‖. As we have noted earlier in Vimla AIR1963SC1572it was held that the term Crl.M.C. 4363/2018 etc. Page 15 of 24 ―fraudulently‖ is wider than the term ―dishonestly‖ which however, requires a wrongful gain and a wrongful

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 29 2019

Jose C Mundadan vs.govt of Nct of Delhi & Anr

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-29-2019

Subject : Land Acquisition

a statutory body established by the Central Government in exercise of its power under Section 7 of the Competition Act, 2002 (“the Competition Act”, for short), the respondent herein, has instituted, through its authorized representative, criminal complaints against the … ―and‖. As we have noted earlier in Vimla AIR1963SC1572it was held that the term Crl.M.C. 4363/2018 etc. Page 15 of 24 ―fraudulently‖ is wider than the term ―dishonestly‖ which however, requires a wrongful gain and a wrongful

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 19 2014

M/S. Dlf Limited and Another Vs. Competition Commission of India and O ...

Court : Competition Appellate Tribunal

Decided on : May-19-2014

Subject : Land Acquisition

the above-said clauses were described as ex-facie unfair and discriminatory attracting the provisions of section 4(2)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter "Act"). It was urged that this amounted to abuse of dominant position by the Appellant. A complaint … Representation "F", the Appellant, could unilaterally reduce the earmarked land of 6.67 acres for the multi storied apartments. 15. It was also submitted that the Clauses "J" and "K" were inserted to the effect that the apartment

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 12 2019

Competition Commission of India vs.m/s. Grasim Industries Ltd.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Sep-12-2019

Subject : MRTP

of the CCI, stating that GIL had abused its dominant position, in terms of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 („Act‟). 1.3 The learned Single Judge has, in the impugned judgment, held that inasmuch as the direction issued … and evidence filed by GIL with its objections to the report of the DG. Single Judge’s impugned judgment 15. W.P.(C) No.4159/2013 challenging the aforementioned order of the CCI was then filed by GIL in this Court. When

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 04 2013

Namrata Marketing Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Competition Commission of India and Ot ...

Court : Allahabad

Decided on : Dec-04-2013

Subject : Land Acquisition

General, Competition Commission of India, New Delhi under Section 41 (2) read with Section 36 (2) of the Competition Act, 2002 (for short, the œCompetition Act?), and further a direction has been sought for upon the Competition Commission of … writ petitions and held that Sections 3-C and 3-D were beyond the legislative competence of the State Legislature. 15. Feeling aggrieved by the aforesaid judgement and order of the Division Bench, the respondent no. 5, namely, Sri

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 30 2016

Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) Vs. Competition Commission of I ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Mar-30-2016

Subject : MRTP

the impugned orders are perverse? Jurisdiction of CCI to entertain the complaints of Micromax and Intex under the Competition Act, 2002 84. The central challenge in these petitions is to the jurisdiction of the CCI to entertain complaints filed … the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (hereafter 'TRIPS'). 122. By virtue of the Patents (Amendment) Act 2002, Section 48 of the Act, which specifies the rights granted to a patentee, was substituted to read as under: … other senior executives from Ericsson global". Ericsson had also placed letter dated 15th June, 2015 addressed to the Additional Director General, CCI which indicates that

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Aug 09 2012

Sajjan Khaitan Proprietor Vs. Eastern India Motion Picture Association ...

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Decided on : Aug-09-2012

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial