NCLAT: Consideration of Debt Restructuring by Lenders Doesn’t Bar Member from Initiating Proceedings  ||  Delhi High Court: In Matters of Medical Evaluation, Courts Should Exercise Restraint  ||  Delhi HC: Any Person in India Has Right to Legally Import Goods from Abroad and Sell the Same  ||  Delhi HC: Waiver to Section 12(5) of Arbitration Act to be Given Once Tribunal is Constituted  ||  Supreme Court Has Asked States to Regularise Existing Court Managers  ||  SC: Union & States to Create Special POSCO Courts on Top Priority  ||  SC Upholds Authority of CERC to Award Compensation for Delays  ||  SC: Arbitral Tribunal Has Discretion to Include in Sum Awarded, Interest at Rate as it Deems Reasonab  ||  SC: Cannot Use Article 142 to Frame Guidelines on Judicial Recusal  ||  SC: Satisfaction Recorder in One EP Won’t Affect Subsequent EPs for Future Breaches    

Belarana Bhattacharyya v. Asian Paints Ltd. - (Competition Commission of India) (27 Jan 2016)

Asian Paints’ Home Solution tie-in arrangements with painters okayed

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India dismissed a complaint alleging anti-competitive activities by Asian Paints. The complainant was displeased with the outcome of a painting contract with Asian Paints. She claimed to have been duped by an advertisement for painting services purported under the ‘Asian Paints Home Solution’ brand, but were in fact contracted to third-party painters. Particularly, though the company had provided an estimate to the homeowner, the contract was fulfilled by a sub-contracted party, freeing Asian Paints from liability to correct the defects in painting. The Commission referred to an earlier finding that the company was not in a dominant player in the market, and its conduct did not affect consumers’ interests. All major companies, including Berger, Nerolac and others provided services for painting homes.

Tags : ASIAN PAINTS   HOME SERVICES   SUB-CONTRACT  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved