Supreme Court: Police May Freeze Bank Accounts under S.102 CrPC in Prevention of Corruption Cases  ||  SC: Arbitrator’s Mandate Ends on Time Expiry; Substituted Arbitrator Must Continue After Extension  ||  SC: Woman May Move Her Department’s ICC For Harassment by Employee of Another Workplace  ||  SC: Women’s Representation Requirement Applies to All Bar Associations in Gujarat  ||  SC: Contempt Power isn’t Judges’ Personal Shield nor a Tool to Silence Legitimate Criticism  ||  SC: Statutory Corporation Can Deduct under S.36(1)(viii) Only for Income from Long-Term Finance  ||  NCLT Kolkata: Costs for Compromise or Arrangement Scheme not Part of Liquidation Expenses  ||  NCLT Ahmedabad: Complaints Against Auditors or Company Secretaries Not Grounds for Company Probe  ||  SC: NCLT Can Forfeit Entire Deposit if Purchaser Defaults on Payment for Liquidation Assets  ||  Meghalaya HC: Non-Signatory or Non-Existent LLP Cannot Claim Arbitration via Group of Companies    

In Re M/s Jaiprakash Associates Ltd., M/s Jaypee Infratech and Ors. - (Competition Commission of India) (26 Oct 2015)

CCI clears Jaypee Group of abuse amidst heavy dissent

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India in a majority ruling dismissed complaints against Jaypee Group’s alleged abuse of its dominant position. It determined that the Group was not in a dominant position in the relevant real estate market, as the market comprised small, medium and large companies, suggesting low entry to barriers. Further, buyers had a plethora of options, leaving Jaypee with an indisputably large, yet unconsolidated position so far as using its position to include unfair contract terms with buyers. In a vehement dissent, however, two members of the Commission ruled that the contractual terms, restricting buyers’ freedoms to exit the contract and access to areas surrounding their properties were severe suggesting the existence of negotiating power beyond that accepted. They noted that Jaypee Group, being several times larger than their closest competitor was clearly in a dominant position. That some of the land it owned came to be acquired pursuant to the agreement the Yamuna Expressway (connecting Delhi and Agra), did not negate its dominance in the region.

Tags : PROPERTY   JAYPEE   DOMINANT   RESIDENTIAL   ABUSE   POSITION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved