Advanced Search Results

Vijay Gupta Vs. M/S. Paper Merchants Association and Others

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

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

Court : Competition Appellate Tribunal

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 … This report was forwarded to the CCI. 32. Along with the information, there was an application filed under section 33 of the Act for some interim orders to the following effect:- a) to freeze 29.87 acres of land

interglobe Aviation Limited Vs the Secretary Competition Commission of ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Monopolies and Restrictive Trade

Acts : Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 - sections 11(1), 33(1)(d),66 ; Competition Act, 2002 (`CA'). - sections 26(1),66(1), 66(3), 66(4), 66(5)

order dated 16th June 2010 passed by the Competition Commission of India (`CCI') under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (`CA').2. The background to the present petitions is that by an order dated 13 th February 2009, the … formed a prima facie opinion that the alleged practice was a restrictive trade practice as defined under Section 33(1)(d) and 33(1)(j) of the MRTP Act. Consequently in exercise of its powers under Regulation 18 of the Monopolies

Magnolia Flat Owners Association and Another Vs. M/S Dlf Universal Lim ...

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

New Delhi Municipal Council Vs. Usha Gangaria and ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

of India Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 744, it was held that the power under Section 33 of the Competition Act, 2002, to pass temporary restraint order can only be exercised when the conditions laid down for exercise of the

institute of Town Planners, India Vs. Council of Architecture and ors

Court : Delhi

Subject : Education

of India Ltd. (2010) 10 SCC 744, it was held that the power under Section 33 of the Competition Act, 2002, to pass temporary restraint order can only be exercised when the conditions laid down for exercise of the

M/S. Vikash Trading Company, Represented by Its Proprietor, C.S. Bohar ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : 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 … SCC 254 andAlchemist Limited Vs. State Bank of Sikkim, (2007) 11 SCC 335, has held that no cause of action would arise at the stage

Premier Rubber Mills vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

on record, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) passed an order dated 06.11.2013 under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 recording a prima facie opinion that the acts and conduct of the Opposite Parties (OP) mentioned therein is … will be well within its jurisdiction to pass ex parte ad interim injunction orders immediately in terms of Section 33 of the Act, while granting post-decisional hearing positively, within a very short span in terms of Regulation 31(2).

Somi Conveyor Beltings Ltd. & Anr. Vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : MRTP

on record, the Competition Commission of India (CCI) passed an order dated 06.11.2013 under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 recording a prima facie opinion that the acts and conduct of the Opposite Parties (OP) mentioned therein is … will be well within its jurisdiction to pass ex parte ad interim injunction orders immediately in terms of Section 33 of the Act, while granting post-decisional hearing positively, within a very short span in terms of Regulation 31(2).

Arcelormittal India Private Limited Vs. Satish Kumar Gupta

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : 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 … comply with any other criteria specified by the Board. (4) An appeal against a liquidation order passed under Section 33 may be filed on grounds of material irregularity or fraud committed in relation to such a liquidation order.62.