Supreme Court: Anti-Suit Injunction Cannot Rest on Speculation of Unenforceable Foreign Decree  ||  SC: High Court’s Location doesn't Become Arbitration Seat Merely by Appointing Arbitrator  ||  SC Disapproves PIL Challenging Inter-Se Evaluation of Tender Bids  ||  Delhi HC: Bail Grant or Cancellation Cannot Depend on Monetary Settlement With Complainant  ||  Kerala HC Directs Bar Council to Publish List of Advocates Practising Without AIBE Clearance, CoP  ||  Rajasthan HC: Candidate Cannot Blame E-Mitra for Failing to Correct Caste Category Within Deadline  ||  Patna HC: Mere FIR Registration cannot Justify Cancellation of PDS Licence  ||  Calcutta HC: NEET Medical Board Cannot Reassess Disability Percentage of PwBD Candidates  ||  Madras HC: MLAs Cannot Challenge Assembly Vote Later if They Raised No Objection During Voting  ||  Karnataka HC Upholds DRDO Land Acquisition, Citing Primacy of National Security    

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