P&H HC: Eyewitness Account Not Credible if Eyewitness Directly Identifies Accused in Court  ||  Delhi HC: Conditions u/s 45 PMLA Have to Give Way to Article 21 When Accused Incarcerated for Long  ||  Delhi High Court: Delhi Police to Add Grounds of Arrest in Arrest Memo  ||  Kerala High Court: Giving Seniority on the Basis of Rules is a Policy Decision  ||  Del. HC: Where Arbitrator has Taken Plausible View, Court Cannot Interfere u/s 34 of A&C Act  ||  Ker. HC: No Question of Estoppel Against Party Where Error is Committed by Court Itself  ||  Supreme Court: Revenue Entries are Admissible as Evidence of Possession  ||  SC: Mere Breakup of Relationship Between Consenting Couple Can’t Result in Criminal Proceedings  ||  SC: Bar u/s 195 CrPC Not Attracted Where Proceedings Initiated Pursuant to Judicial Order  ||  NTF Gives Comprehensive Suggestions on Enhancing Better Working Conditions of Medical Professions    

Shri Shyam Vir Singh and M/s DLF Universal Limited - (Competition Commission of India) (04 Jan 2016)

CCI dismisses complaint against DLF

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India dismissed a complaint against DLF Universal Limited, a real estate company of national renown, for abusing its dominant position in the market. The Informant had averred that DLF was dominant in Gurgaon, Haryana, having received over half of all realty project licences issued between 1981 and 1990; and it owned nearly 15.23 million square feet of office space and 143 million square feet of land in Gurgaon. Relying on the Director General’s investigation, Commission held DLF to hold only 8.9 per cent of the market share, and it was between the 3rd and 5th largest developer of commercial real estate in the region. Coupled with the abundant choice buyers had, DLF was determined to not be in a position to “influence the conditions of competition in the relevant market”.

Tags : DOMINANT POSITION   REAL ESTATE   GURGAON   DLF  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2024 - All Rights Reserved