NCLAT: Can’t Dismiss Restoration App. if Filed in 30 Days from Date of Dismissal of Original App.  ||  Delhi HC: Communication between Parties through Whatsapp Constitute Valid Agreement  ||  Delhi HC Seeks Response from Govt. Over Penalties on Petrol Pumps Supplying Fuel to Old Vehicles  ||  Centre Notifies "Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Rules, 2025"  ||  Del. HC: Can’t Reject TM Owner’s Claim Merely because Defendant Could have Sought Removal of Mark  ||  Bombay HC: Cannot Treat Sole Director of OPC, Parallelly with Separate Legal Entity  ||  Delhi HC: Can Apply 'Family of Marks' Concept to Injunct Specific Marks  ||  HP HC: Can’t Set Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Mere Irregularity  ||  Cal. HC: Order by HC Bench Not Conferred With Determination by Roster is Void  ||  Calcutta HC: Purchase Order Including Arbitration Agreement to Prevail Over Tax Invoice Lacking it    

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 2025 - All Rights Reserved