MP High Court: Estranged Husband Entitled to Loss of Consortium Compensation After Wife’s Death  ||  J&K & Ladakh HC: Claims under Roshni Act Void Ab Initio, Ownership Rights Null from Inception  ||  Madras High Court Directs Expedited Trials in 216 Pending Criminal Cases Against MPs and MLAs  ||  MP High Court: Allowing Minor to Drive Without Valid License Constitutes Breach of Insurance Policy  ||  Punjab & Haryana High Court: Cyber Fraud Cases Uphold Public Trust, Cannot Be Quashed by Compromise  ||  SC: Customer-Banker Relationship Based on Mutual Trust, Postmaster’s Reinstatement Quashed  ||  Supreme Court: Company Buying Software for Efficiency and Profit Is Not a ‘Consumer’ under CPA  ||  SC: Long Custody or Trial Delay Not Ground for Bail in Commercial Narcotic Cases if S.37 Unmet  ||  Calcutta HC Disqualifies Politician Mukul Roy from Assembly under Anti-Defection Law  ||  Supreme Court Bans Mining in and Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries    

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