Mr. Mainejer Prasad Gupta v. Bajaj Auto Ltd. & Others
Case brief
What is this about?
The Competition Commission examined an allegation that Bajaj Auto Ltd. violated the Competition Act by granting a dealership in Nilbagan to an existing dealer without offering it to an applicant in Hojai and then allotted the area to the existing dealer. The Commission held that application submission did not create contractual rights, the relationship was vertical, and Bajaj Auto lacked significa
What did the court decide?
The information filed against the Opposite Parties is directed to be closed forthwith under Section 26(2) of the Act.
What the court decided
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA
Case No. 23 of 2020
In Re:
Mr. Mainejer Prasad Gupta
Informant
C/o Hojai Motors, Mazid Road, P.O-Hojai, P.S-Hojai, District -Hojai, Assam, 782435
And
Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai Pune Highway, Main Road Near Ganapati Mandir, Akurdi, Pune-411035
Opposite Party No. 1
M/s S.K.Automobiles
Opposite Party No. 2
Near Police Outpost, Nilbagan P.O-Nilbagan, P.S-Nilbagan, District-Hojai, Assam-782445
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the grant of dealership to an existing dealer away from the applicant's location violates Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
Whether a mere application for dealership without acceptance creates a binding agreement or confers contractual rights.
Whether the two-wheeler market lacks significant market power such that vertical restraints cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition.
Coram
Ashok Kumar Gupta
Sangeeta Verma
Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court