Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: competition act 2002 section 42a · Page 1 of about 12 results (0.017 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 10 2019

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

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Apr-10-2019

Subject : MRTP

all these proceedings, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners challenge various provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter “the Act”). The specific challenge is to provisions of Sections 22(3), 27(b), 53A, 53B, 53C, 53D, 53E, … challenge various provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter “the Act”). The specific challenge is to provisions of Sections 22(3), 27(b), 53A, 53B, 53C, 53D, 53E, 53F and 61 (“the impugned provisions” hereafter) of the Act and

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 18 2018

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

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-18-2018

Subject : MRTP

14 of 42 contravention of orders of the CCI or DG under Section 42 to 44 of the Competition Act and not for contravention of Section 3 and 4 of the Competition Act by the Company is misconceived. … the learned Single Judge with respect to the scope, ambit and applicability of Section 48 of the Companies Act, 2002 were never raised before and / or dealt by the Division Bench in Cadila (Supra). It is stated … directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which

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 … non-compliance with orders or directions of the Commission under specified provisions (i.e., Sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A), the Commission, after inquiry, having found absence of “reasonable cause”. This court does not accept the

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 … non-compliance with orders or directions of the Commission under specified provisions (i.e., Sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A), the Commission, after inquiry, having found absence of “reasonable cause”. This court does not accept the

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 … non-compliance with orders or directions of the Commission under specified provisions (i.e., Sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A), the Commission, after inquiry, having found absence of “reasonable cause”. This court does not accept the

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 19 2014

Rajkumar Dyeing and Printing Works Private Limited and Vs. Competition ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-19-2014

Subject : MRTP

RSI and `13,65,000/- in case of Rajkumar Dyeing. The said penalties were imposed under Section 42 of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter the ‘Act’) for failure on part of the petitioners to comply with the direction to file an … to comply with the orders or directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 19 2014

M/S R S Industries Vs. Competition Commission of India and Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-19-2014

Subject : MRTP

RSI and `13,65,000/- in case of Rajkumar Dyeing. The said penalties were imposed under Section 42 of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter the ‘Act’) for failure on part of the petitioners to comply with the direction to file an … to comply with the orders or directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 19 2014

Rajkumar Dyeing and Printing Works Private Limited and Vs. Competition ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-19-2014

Subject : MRTP

RSI and `13,65,000/- in case of Rajkumar Dyeing. The said penalties were imposed under Section 42 of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter the ‘Act’) for failure on part of the petitioners to comply with the direction to file an … to comply with the orders or directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 19 2014

M/S R S Industries Vs. Competition Commission of India and Anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-19-2014

Subject : MRTP

RSI and `13,65,000/- in case of Rajkumar Dyeing. The said penalties were imposed under Section 42 of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter the ‘Act’) for failure on part of the petitioners to comply with the direction to file an … to comply with the orders or directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Nov 19 2014

Rajkumar Dyeing and Printing Works Private Limited and Vs. Competition ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-19-2014

Subject : MRTP

RSI and `13,65,000/- in case of Rajkumar Dyeing. The said penalties were imposed under Section 42 of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereafter the ‘Act’) for failure on part of the petitioners to comply with the direction to file an … to comply with the orders or directions of the Commission issued under sections 27, 28, 31, 32, 33, 42A and 43A of the Act, he shall be punishable with fine which may extend to rupees one lakh

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