Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: competition act 2002 section 53 i · Page 1 of about 890 results (0.111 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.

Dec 02 2014

Competition Commission of India Vs. Jcb India Ltd. and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-02-2014

Subject : MRTP

are as under:Bull Machines Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.2 herein) filed information before CCI under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the said Act by JCB India Ltd. (respondent No.1 … of the Act and only the order passed by the CCI under Section 26(2) is made appealable under Section 53-A. It was made clear in CCI v. SAIL (supra) that the directions passed by CCI in exercise of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 02 2014

Competition Commission of India Vs. Jcb India Ltd. and Ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Dec-02-2014

Subject : MRTP

are as under:Bull Machines Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.2 herein) filed information before CCI under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the said Act by JCB India Ltd. (respondent No.1 … of the Act and only the order passed by the CCI under Section 26(2) is made appealable under Section 53-A. It was made clear in CCI v. SAIL (supra) that the directions passed by CCI in exercise of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Mar 24 2021

Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association Vs. Nbcc (i ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Mar-24-2021

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 … Regulation 38(1)(b) of the CIRP Regulations; and such payment has to be a liquidated sum, as stated under Section 53 of the Code. Per contra, it was contended on behalf of the resolution applicant and the IRP that

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Dec 31 2013

Sri Agasteswara Swamy Temple, Vangipuram Vs. V.Siva Kameswara Rao and ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-31-2013

Subject : Education

Steel Authority of India Limited and another1, the Supreme Court considered the scope of Section 53-A(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 ( which provided for an appeal to the Appellate Tribunal against any directions issued or a decision made

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 02 2014

M/S. Fast Way Transmission Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Kansan News Pvt. L ...

Court : Competition Appellate Tribunal

Decided on : May-02-2014

Subject : MRTP

Matched in: Court Competition Appellate Tribunal

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

May 04 2026

M/S Pradeep Colonisers and Suppliers Pvt Ltd vs M/S Mbl Infrastructure ...

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-04-2026

Subject : Arbitration

that where the resolution plan contains a provision for combination, as referred to in section 5 of the Competition Act, 2002, the resolution applicant shall obtain the approval of the Competition Commission of India under that Act prior to … the amount to be paid to such creditors in the event of liquidation of the corporate debtor under Section 53; or the2021 SCC OnLine SC 313O.M.P. (COMM) 469/2025 & connected matters Page 16 of 85 amount that would

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 18 2024

Airports Economic Regulatory Authority Of India Vs. Delhi Internationa ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-18-2024

Subject : 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 … No.8217 of 2023 With Civil Appeal No.7767 of 2023 With Civil Appeal Nos.10691-10692 of 2024 Page 1 of 53 With Civil Appeal No.393 of 2024 With Civil Appeal No.10678 of 2024 And With Civil Appeal No.10659 of

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: … lack of understanding of the subject prior to directing investigation against Ericsson. 53. Ms. Singh also sought to dispute Mr. Kathpalia's interpretation of proviso of

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Oct 01 2018

Rajasthan Cylinders and Containers Limited Vs. u.o.i and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Oct-01-2018

Subject : 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 … agencies, which include CCI and COMPAT, have to ensure that these objectives are fulfilled by curbing anti-competitive agreements.” 5370) The Court also mentioned, in particular, that competition leads to economic efficiency, economic growth and development as well

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jan 23 2009

Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited and Another Versus Telecom Regulatory Aut ...

Court : Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT

Decided on : Jan-23-2009

Subject : Service Tax

completed. 16. On 17.11.2006, the Authority issued a Consultation Paper to discuss various issues related to promotion of competition in country’s Domestic Leased Circuits (DLC) market, seeking the views of stakeholders thereon. Stating that the services provided … Supreme Court in West Bengal Electricity Regulatory Commission v. CESC Ltd [AIR 2002 SC 3588] as also in L. Chander Kumar v. Union of India … the terms and conditions of the licences granted to service providers when, in fact, as per the TRAI Act, it is incumbent upon the Authority to ensure that the licence conditions are implemented. It is also their … by the Respondent in exercise of the powers conferred upon it under Section 36 of the TRAI Act, read with sub-clauses (ii), (iii), (v) and … Herrington v. British Railways Board (1972) 2 WLR 537. Circumstantial flexibility, one additional or different fact may

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