Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof  ||  SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required  ||  Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt  ||  Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment  ||  Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution  ||  Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty  ||  Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry  ||  Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act  ||  NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another    

Meru Travel Solutions Private Limited and Uber India Systems Pvt. Ltd. - (Competition Commission of India) (22 Dec 2015)

CCI dismisses Meru’s ‘dominant position’ complaint against Uber

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India rejected Meru Travel Solutions’ (owner of Meru Cabs) complaint against Uber for holding a dominant position in the radio taxi market in Kolkata. The Commission determined that Uber did not have a dominant position in the relevant market, which included radio-taxi’s and local yellow taxis, and rejected market reports adduced on behalf of Meru claiming Uber’s majority share for lacking veracity. In its complaint Meru had alleged Uber to have undertaken predatory strategies that excluded companies from the radio-taxi market, allowing it to operate independent of competition. Meru’s allegations were predicated on Uber’s “unabated predatory pricing” and business model which forewent profits in favour of poaching drivers from other operators.

Tags : RADIO TAXI   DOMINANT POSITION   KOLKATA   MERU   UBER  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved