Competition Appellate Tribunal Court April 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Shree Cement Limited Vs. Buildersâandeuro;andtrade; Association of In ...
Court: Competition Appellate Tribunal
Decided on: Apr-29-2014
V.S. Sirpurkar, Chairman. 1. M/s. Shree Cement (the "Appellant") was found guilty of breach of sections 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(b) read with section 3(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Competition Act'). On that account the Competition Commission of India (hereinafter the 'CCI') in case No. RTPE 52 of 2006 imposed a fine of Rs.397.51 crores on the Appellant. This amount was calculated on the basis of net profit of the Appellant from 20th May, 2009 to 31st March, 2011. The CCI ordered 0.5 times of this net profit. It is this order of imposing penalty which is sought to be stayed. 2. It may be mentioned that the proceedings against twelve cement manufacturing concerns were initiated by the MRTP Commission, taking suo-moto notice of an article in The Economic Times on 9th May, 2006 and 29th June, 2006. The said step was taken in view of a sharp raise in the cement prices from 2003-2005. It was Rs.125/- to Rs.145/- per bag, upto December 2005, but the price reached ...
M/S. A.R. Polymers Pvt. Ltd. and Others Vs. Competition Commission of ...
Court: Competition Appellate Tribunal
Decided on: Apr-22-2014
1. This order will cover I.A. Nos. 58, 59, 60, 63, 64, 67, 69, 72, 73 and I.A. No. 10/2014 in Appeals Nos. 34 to 41 of 2013 and Appeal No. 08/2014 respectively, except I.A. No. 80/2013 in Appeal No.43/2013 in which separate order shall be passed. All these appellants are the manufacturers of rubber products, especially the shoes which are used by the military and para-military forces. The relevant products in this case are Jungle Boots (Hunters) which have to be used while operating in the jungle. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has found all these manufacturers/appellants guilty of contravention of the provisions of Section 3(3)(a) to (d) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The main ground on which the CCI has found these manufacturers guilty is that they have quoted identical or near identical rates in the Rate Contract tender floated at the instance of the Director General of Supply and Disposal, Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce...
V. Senthil Nathan Vs. Competition Commission of India
Court: Competition Appellate Tribunal
Decided on: Apr-21-2014
1. This appeal is against the order dated 1st July, 2013 passed by the CCI refusing to entertain the information filed before it by one Shri V.Senthilnathan, the appellant. The said information was against opponent no. 1 M/s. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. and opponent No. 2 M/s. E-Meditak (TPA) Services Ltd. 2. As per the informant, it seems that the opponent no. 2 refused to entertain the claim made by the appellant/informant as a result of which, the informant came up with the information against the opponents. The informant was covered by the group health insurance offered by opponent no. 1 for which the third party administrator was the opponent no. 2. In the sense, that opponent no. 2 was to process the claim made by the claimant under the insurance policy. 3. As per the information, the informant holds a CanCard, a credit card offered by the Canara Bank. For the Cancard holders, there was a policy of group medi-insurance. The informant claims that all the CanCard holders have t...
Co-ordination Committee of Artist and Technicians of West Bengal Film ...
Court: Competition Appellate Tribunal
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
V.S. SIRPURKAR, CHAIRMAN: 1. In this Appeal, the majority order passed by the Competition Commission of India (in short the "CCI") is in challenge. The operative order passed by the CCI is as under "8.4 The Commission also directs the OP-1 and OP-2 to 'cease and desist' from the following practices and take suitable measures to modify or remove them from their articles of association, rules and regulations; i) The existing rules of Eastern India Motion Picture Association, OP-1 on dubbing must be dispensed with and there should be no bar or prohibition on exhibition of dubbed films or serials produced in any language in the areas under its control. ii) The Co-ordination Committee of Artist and Technicians of West Bengal Film and Television Industry should not impose any restrictions in any manner on distribution and exhibition of the Films or TV serials in the areas under its control." 2. The said order was passed by the CCI, having found the original OP-1 and OP-2 guilty of breach of ...
Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. and Another Vs. Competition Commission of ...
Court: Competition Appellate Tribunal
Decided on: Apr-02-2014
V.S. SIRPURKAR, CHAIRMAN: 1. This judgment shall govern two appeals, they being Appeal No. 91 of 2012 by M/s. Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. vs. CCI and Ors. and Appeal No. 92 of 2012 by M/s. Kapoor Glass (India) Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s. Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. 2. This Appeal No. 91 of 2012 is filed on behalf of M/s. Schott Glass India Pvt. Ltd. (Appellant) against the order of Competition Commission of India (for short the 'CCI') whereby CCI has held the Appellant guilty of contravention of section 4 of the Competition Act (for short the "Act") and has inflicted a penalty of Rs.5.66 crore. It has also passed the cease and desist order to the following effect:- a) That Schott Glass India should desist from applying dissimilar conditions while giving discounts to Schott Kaisha vis-a-vis other Converters. b) The terms of transactions for supply of tubes to Schott Kaisha, the JV should be similar and non-discriminatory vis-a-vis the other Converters. c) The discount on both amber and clear ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›