The Competition Commission of India disposed of an information filed by an applicant against a real estate developer alleging unfair trade practices under sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. Noting the absence of evidence for dominant position or collusion, the Commission closed the case.
Information ordered to be closed forthwith.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Case No. 23 of 2015
In Re:
Shri Rambir Singh House No. 693-P Sector-21, Pocket-E Gurgaon, Haryana-122016
Informant
And
M/s Puri Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Regd. Office at 11-12a, Ground Floor Tolstoy House 15 & 17, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001
Opposite Party
CORAM
Mr. S. L. Bunker Member
Mr. Sudhir Mital Member
Mr. Augustine Peter Member
Mr. U. C. Nahta Member
Mr. M. S. Sahoo Member
Appearances: Informant-in-Person.
C. No. 23 of 2015 Page 1 of 6
Order under section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002
C. No. 23 of 2015 Page 2 of 6
consented to at the time of booking the unit and was not disclosed by the Opposite Party. Aggrieved thereby, the Informant stopped making further payments and sought refund from the Opposite Party of the amount already paid to it. However, the Opposite Party cancelled the allotment vide its letter dated 30.10.2014 after forfeiting earnest money and other non-refundable amounts.
C. No. 23 of 2015 Page 3 of 6
and other amounts on the ground that the Informant was bound by the terms of the provisional agreement which was stated to be a composite part of the Buyer‟s Agreement.
C. No. 23 of 2015 Page 4 of 6
in Gurgaon appear to be distinct from the neighbouring areas such as Delhi, Noida and Ghaziabad in the National Capital Region and accordingly, the relevant geographic market would be Gurgaon.
C. No. 23 of 2015 Page 5 of 6
Sd/(S. L. Bunker) Member
Sd/(Sudhir Mital) Member
Sd/(Augustine Peter) Member
Sd/(U. C. Nahta) Member
Sd/(M. S. Sahoo) Member
New Delhi Date: 24/06/2015
C. No. 23 of 2015
6 of 6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the information alleging contravention of sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002, merits examination.
Whether the opposite party enjoyed a dominant position in the relevant market of residential unit sales in Gurgaon.
Whether there is evidence of an agreement amongst developers to charge extra amounts, violating section 3 of the Act.
3 provisions across 1 enactments
Shri Rambir Singh
S. L. Bunker
Sudhir Mital
Augustine Peter
U. C. Nahta
M. S. Sahoo
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
