Delhi HC Rejects Plea Against BCCI Team Named 'Team India', Terms it a Sheer Waste of Time  ||  Bombay HC: No Absolute Right for Citizens to Access Public Offices  ||  Delhi HC: Suit Withdrawal After Compromise Doesn’t Result in Executable Decree  ||  Delhi HC: ITSC Abolition Doesn’t Void Settlement Pleas Filed Between Feb 1–Mar 31, 2021  ||  Rajasthan HC: State Must Set Up Trauma Centre, Art Institute; Temple Board Can Only Assist  ||  Kerala HC: LIC Cancer Cover Starts From First Diagnosis After Waiting Period, Not Expert Opinion  ||  Kerala HC: Spouse’s Ill Treatment of Children is Cruelty under Section 10(1) Divorce Act  ||  Supreme Court Acquits Chennai Man Sentenced to Death in Child Rape-Murder Case  ||  SC: Only Disclosure Leading to Weapon Recovery Admissible under Section 27 Evidence Act  ||  Supreme Court Orders Strict Enforcement on Helmets, Lane Discipline & Headlight Use    

Airline Operators Committee v. Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. - (Competition Commission of India) (17 Nov 2015)

DIAL’s hundred per cent fee increase not an abuse of dominant position

MANU/CO/0102/2015

MRTP/ Competition Laws

Delhi International Airport Pvt. Ltd. was given reprieve from proceedings for unfair and discriminatory increases in airport floor rental charges. DIAL, a company operating and managing the Indira Gandhi International Airport at New Delhi, was alleged to have increased office space rental used by some airlines by up to 100 per cent, and having done so in a manner discriminating between airlines. The Commission noted that the agreement between airlines and the concessionaire did not stipulate only a nominal 7.5 per cent yearly increase in rent. Further, DIAL’s actions have brought the License Fee per square meter of terminal space for all airlines to the same amount.

Relevant : Section 4 Competition Act, 2002 Act

Tags : COMPETITION   AIRPORT FEE   EQUILIBRIUM   DOMINANT POSITION  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved