Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: competition act 2002 section 34 · Page 1 of about 1,111 results (0.040 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

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 … 1. By this petition filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short “the said Arbitration Act), the petitioner has impugned the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 10 2013

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

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Decided on : Jan-10-2013

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

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 … consists of Appeal No. 23 of 2011 which relates to CCI Case No. 24, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 of 2010 in which Shri Pushkar Dutt Sharma and Smt. Kiran Sharma were the Informants. Similarly Appeal

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Apr 10 2019

Mahindra Electric Mobility Limited and Anr. Vs.cci and Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-10-2019

Subject : MRTP

Ramana, J in Excel Crop. Care (supra), to the following effect: ―84. It is well settled that the Competition Act, 2002 is a regulatory legislation enacted to maintain free market so that the Adam Smith's concept of invincible hands … and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 (Section 18); Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (Section 34); Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (Section15) etc. This Court notices that firstly, the Act creates new

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 30 2012

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

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Nov-30-2012

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 … this Court holds that the writ petitions are maintainable, before this Court. 34. However, the contentions raised on behalf of the respondents stating that the … 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

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 07 2012

Accreditation Commission for Conformity Assessment Bodies Pvt. Ltd. Vs ...

Court : Competition Commission of India CCI

Decided on : Nov-07-2012

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Commission of India CCI

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 06 2016

M/s. Sarathi Enterprises Vs. Union of India, Through Executive Enginee ...

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Jun-06-2016

Subject : Arbitration

The Respondent never agreed to it. On the aspect of violation of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 (for short, the Competition Act ), the Executive Engineer by letter dated 7 December 2010, had stated that … the parties passed Award dated 6 March 2013. 7. Being aggrieved, the Respondent filed an Arbitration Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act ) for setting aside the Award.

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Feb 24 2012

Cybernetics Network Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Bisquare Technologies Pvt ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-24-2012

Subject : Land Acquisition

to pay CNPL Rs.98.77,672/- together with interest @ 9% from 30th March 2002 till the date of the Award and interest @ 18% per annum … 1. These three petitions have been filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 against the same Award dated 14th March 2005 passed by the … Technical Information as also a list of at least one recommended vendor with the capability to supply at competitive prices consistent with quality standards, each of the parts comprising the STB. Delivery Schedule-means the time within which

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 06 2026

Pashchimanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited vs IL and Fs Engineering an ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-06-2026

Subject : Land Acquisition

not replacing the transformers, the Petitioner herein started deducting money from his bills.(xv) Further, the Petitioner issued the competition certificate to theRespondent/Claimant only after the expiry of Defects Liability Period i.e., on 05.04.2022 indicating to the Respondent/Claimant … issued by the CMRS under the Delhi Metro Railway (Operation and Maintenance)Act, 2002 (hereinafter “the Delhi Metro Act”) and heldthat the cumulative effect of the … Kaushik, Mr. Shashank Tiwari and Mr. H.N. Thangal, AdvocatesCORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBRAMONIUM PRASADJUDGMENT (ORAL)1. The present Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration andConciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) has been filed by the Petitioner

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 20 2017

Securities and Exchange Board of India Vs. Shri Kanaiyalal Baldevbhai ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-20-2017

Subject : MRTP

9 Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, Section 36A; The Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(r); The Competition Act, 2002, Section 3; The Food Security and Standards Act, 2006, Section 24(2); Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 20; Usurious Loans … client order, if it involves fraud then the dealing in securities will be deemed to be fraudulent. 32 34. An argument has been introduced by the Mr. K.T.S. Tulsi, learned senior counsel, that sub-clause (q) of regulation

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