Monopoly - Judgment Search Results

Monopoly Carriers & Cargo Pvt Ltd vs.union of India and Ors

Court: Delhi

THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on:28. 01.2019 + W.P.(C) 1871/2017& C.M. No.8317/2017 MONOPOLY CARRIERS & CARGO PVT LTD ........ Petitioner versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS Advocates who appeared in this

Hmm Ltd. Vs. Director General, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practi ...

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: 1998VIAD(SC)214; AIR1998SC2691; [1998]94CompCas132(SC); JT1998(5)SC433; 1998(4)SCALE490; (1998)6SCC485

ORDERBharucha, J.1. Under appeal is the judgment and order dated 11th May, 1989 passed by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission'). It held that the appellants were guilty

Hindustan Lever Ltd., Bombay Vs. the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade ... Overruled

Court: Supreme Court of India

Reported in: AIR1977SC1285; [1977]47CompCas581(SC); (1977)3SCC227; [1977]3SCR455

the subject-matter of the agreement was sale of trucks of a type in which the Telco had a monopoly inasmuch as no other firm produced trucks which were of such special quality and specifications. Hence, there was

Tanfac Industries Ltd., Rep. by M.H. Upadhyaya, Joint President Vs. Mo ...

Court: Chennai

Reported in: 2003(155)ELT251(Mad)

the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for and quash the proceedings of the first respondent, Monopolies Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, New Delhi, in RTP Enquiry 238/98 (Mis. Application) dated 27.5.99 insofar as the petitioner

Ankur Exports Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 2010CompLR43,[2010]100SCL1(Delhi)

under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking to challenge the impugned order dated 13.11.2000 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission ('the Commission' for short) which raises the issue of interpretation of Section 12B

Hindustan Lever Ltd. and anr. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Pra ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: 1999IIIAD(Delhi)515; [1999]97CompCas382(Delhi); 79(1999)DLT234; 1999(49)DRJ329

to as 'Colgate') filed a complaint along with complainant No. 2, claiming to be a consumer, before the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (hereinafter referred to as the 'Commission') against M/s. Hindustan Lever Limited complaining that

Pennwalt (i) Ltd. and anr. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practi ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: AIR1999Delhi23; [1999]97CompCas163(Delhi); 74(1998)DLT422; 1998(46)DRJ434

Constitution of India, is whether a preliminary investigation, as envisaged in Section 11 or Section 36C of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (for short the Act) is a condition precedent to the issue of

R.C. Sood and Co. (P) Ltd. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practi ...

Court: Delhi

Reported in: [1996]86CompCas626(Delhi); 62(1996)DLT272; 1996(38)DRJ118

to appear before it in connection with the application of the second respondent under Section 12-B of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (for short 'the Mrtp Act') claiming compensation from the petitioners. Briefly stated,

Sushil Kumar Dalmia and anr. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Prac ...

Court: Kolkata

Reported in: (1993)2CALLT320(HC),[1994]79CompCas568(Cal)

sue in a representative capacity and prayed for a writ of mandamus commanding respondent . No. 1, the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission, having its office at Bikaner House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi, to quash, recall

Raymond Woollen Mills Ltd. Vs. Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practi ...

Court: Mumbai

Reported in: [1979]49CompCas686(Bom)

R.L. Aggarwal, J.1. This writ petition arises under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (hereinafter refereed to as 'the MRTP Act'). The petitioner seeks withdrawal, cancellation