Advanced Search Results
Sajjan Khaitan Proprietor Vs. Eastern India Motion Picture Association ...
Competition Commission of India CCI
Aug-09-2012
MRTP
Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAll India Tyre Dealersâ Federation Vs. Tyre Manufacturers
Competition Commission of India CCI
Oct-30-2012
MRTP
Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskChettinad International Coal Terminal Private Limited, Rep., by its Di ...
Chennai
Mar-29-2016
MRTP
Matched in: Parties Chettinad International Coal Terminal Private Limited, Rep., by its Director, Chennai Vs. The Competition Commission of India, Rep., by its Registrar, New Delhi and Others
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask18-section briefs on any result in this list
b.k Educational Services Pvt Ltd Vs. Parag Gupta and Associates
Supreme Court of India
Oct-11-2018
Land Acquisition
under Information Technology Act, 2000 Appellate Tribunal under Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 under Appellate Tribunal Competition Act, 2002 Appellate Authority under Insolvency & Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Appellate Tribunal Companies Act, 2013 under National Company Law Tribunal … APPEAL NO.4979 OF2018CIVIL APPEAL NO.5819 OF2018CIVIL APPEAL NO.7286 OF2018JUDGMENT R.F. NARIMAN, J.1. The present appeals are concerned with Section 238A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (“Code”), which was inserted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code … For this purpose, he relied upon a number of judgments and Sections 25(3), 60 and 61 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. He also handed
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskArcelormittal India Private Limited Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta
Supreme Court of India
Oct-04-2018
Land Acquisition
that where the resolution plan contains a provision for combination, as referred to in Section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002 (12 of 2003), the resolution applicant shall obtain the approval of the Competition Commission of India under that … the Committee of Creditors once it is complete in all respects. According to him, a conjoint reading of Section 25(2)(i) of the Code, read with Section 30(3) and the second proviso to Section 30(4), would necessarily lead to
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskBcl Old Co Limited and Others Vs. Basf Plc and Others
UK Supreme Court
Oct-24-2012
Education
appeal and his oral submissions) from 21 November 2001. However, on 20 June 2003 section 47A of the Competition Act 1998, as inserted by section 18(1) of the Enterprise Act 2002, came into force, giving BCL the alternative … UK ("the Chapter I prohibition") while section 18 prohibits abuse of dominant position ("the Chapter II prohibition"). Under section 25, contained in Chapter III of Part I of the Act, the Office of Fair Trading ("OFT") was given
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskM/S. Vikash Trading Company, Represented by Its Proprietor, C.S. Bohar ...
Chennai
Nov-30-2012
Education
cannot render the Final Findings, without referring the matter to the Competition Commission, under the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002, cannot be held to be valid in the eye of law. The issuance of the Disclosure Statement, by … Assessment and Collection of Anti-dumping Duty on Dumped Articles and for Determination of Injury) Rules, 1995, read with Section 9A and 9B of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, and to quash the same in respect of goods … 2.7.2012, by asking for comments. The petitioner had made its submissions, dated 25.7.2012, and had also filed a rejoinder to the submissions made by the
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskIn Re: Bengal Chemist and Druggist Association
Competition Commission of India CCI
Mar-11-2014
MRTP
Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskRajasthan Cylinders and Containers Limited Vs. u.o.i and Anr
Supreme Court of India
Oct-01-2018
MRTP
indulged in cartilisation, thereby influencing and rigging the prices, thus, violating the provisions of Section 3(3)(d) of the Competition Act, 2002 (for short, the ‘Act’). The CCI, as a result, imposed severe penalties in the form of fines under … rates in different States. The D.G. had analyzed the bidding pattern for the various parties for all the 25 States. He found that :- a. b. The orders were placed on all the 50 successful bidders. The
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAirports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India Vs. Delhi Internationa ...
Supreme Court of India
Oct-18-2024
MRTP
in proceedings initiated suo moto by it since it is a dominus litus in such proceedings;49 47 The Competition Act 2002; Section 53S; Also see the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations 2009; Regulation 51 48 (2010) 10 SCC744[104]. 49 … does not have a ‘personal interest’ in the matter. In Jindal Therma Power Company Ltd. v. Karnataka Power 25 “14. […]. I have never heard of a Judge of first instance briefing counsel in a Court of
Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & AskAI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »