11.7 Mystery Shopping Audit at certain places is conducted by the dealers amongst themselves to check and prevent the giving of additional or unfair discounts. However, MSIL is not a part of such agreements and only acts as an independent third-party in relation to such agreements among dealers. Its role is limited to that of an adjudicator. If culpability is found in the mystery shopping report qua any particular dealer by other dealers, for example Dealer X, then the report is shared with MSIL. MSIL, in turn, merely in the interest of natural justice and fair play, sends the report to Dealer X and seeks its comments thereon. Finally, it communicates the penalty to Dealer X. Thus, as a third-party, MSIL is far from being an active participant/proposer/inventor of the scheme and is highly akin to an adjudicator. It merely communicates the appropriate penalty to be levied by the dealers, as decided amongst themselves, for violation of the mutually agreed-upon guidelines. MSIL merely playing the role of an independent third-party in the dealers policing themselves inter se does not amount to having an RPM agreement qua discounts by MSIL with its dealers. SOP and SPG guidelines of MSIL, which cover relevant aspects of maintaining quality standards of a dealership, do not indicate any discount issues. Therefore, MSIL’s intention is clearly not to control the imposition of discounts by the dealers. The dealers merely utilise the father figure persona of MSIL as an unbiased outside regulator/judge for the scheme.
