Shri Kshitiz Arya & other v. Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd. & Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The Competition Commission examined an allegation that film producers colluded to postpone movie releases to share the market. The Commission found no evidence of concerted action and held that release scheduling is a legitimate business decision, not an anti-competitive practice.
What did the court decide?
The Commission is of the prima facie opinion that no case of contravention is made out and the matter is ordered to be closed forthwith.
What the court decided
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Case No. 03 of 2018
In Re:
| 1. | Shri Kshitiz Arya |
|
|---|---|---|
| D-4, Tower-3, New Moti Bagh, | ||
| Shanti Path, New Delhi – 110 023 | Informant No. 1 | |
| 2. | Shri Purushottam Anand | |
| C-90, 3rdFloor, Chhatarpur Enclave, | ||
| Phase-2, New Delhi – 110 074 | Informant No. 2 | |
| And | ||
| 1. | Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd. | |
| Zion Bizworld, Subhash Road 'A', | ||
| Next to Garware Institute, Vile Parle (East), | ||
| Mumbai, Maharashtra– 400 057 |
Opposite Party No. 1 | |
| 2. | Bhansali Productions | |
| 601/B Swati Mitra, Gulmohar Cross, | ||
| Road No. 7, J.V.P.D. Scheme, Juhu, | ||
| Mumbai, Maharashtra– 400 049 |
Opposite Party No. 2 | |
| 3. | Ms. Twinkle Khanna | |
| Block No. 4/A, Pushpa Niwas, | ||
| Dr. Rajendra Prasad Road, | ||
| Behind Shiv Sagar Hotel, Mulund (West), | ||
| Mumbai, Maharashtra– 400 080 |
Opposite Party No. 3 | |
| 4. | Kriarj Entertainment Private Limited | |
| Shop No. Gf 34, Ground Floor, | ||
| Case No. 03 of 2018 | Page 1 of 8 |
Issues for consideration
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the postponement of movie release dates by producers to avoid box office clash constitutes an anti-competitive agreement under Section 3(3) of the Act.
Whether the alleged allocation of time windows for film release amounts to sharing of the market.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Kshitiz Arya
- petitioner
Purushottam Anand
- respondent
Viacom18 Media Pvt. Ltd.
- respondent
Bhansali Productions
- respondent
Twinkle Khanna
- respondent
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court