Supreme Court: Banks Cannot Effectively Blacklist Lawyers by Placing Them on Caution Lists  ||  Madras HC: Advocates Can't Seek Out-of-Turn Case Listing Through Writ Petitions  ||  J&K&L HC: Vehicle Can't Remain in Police Custody During NDPS Trial over Possible Confiscation  ||  J&K&L HC: Prolonged Stagnation in Small Cadres Does Not Grant Right to Promotion  ||  Delhi HC Rejects Bail Plea of Athar Khan in Alleged Delhi Riots Conspiracy  ||  Delhi HC Full Bench: School Employee's Suspension Ends if DOE Approval Isn't Given in 15 Days  ||  Allahabad HC: Mere Note of Failed Conciliation Not Sufficient for Lok Adalat Proceedings  ||  Delhi HC: Govt Created 'Utter Chaos' in OBC Reservation Rules Through Conflicting Notifications  ||  Calcutta HC: Acceptance of Rent After Quit Notice Doesn't Waive Tenancy Termination  ||  Delhi HC Flags EFI Selection Criteria Breach in Asian Games Dressage Team, Declines to Interfere    

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 2026 - All Rights Reserved