SC: Statutory Authorities may Intervene When Housing Societies Delay Membership Decisions || SC: Quasi-Judicial Authorities Cannot Exercise Review Powers Unless Expressly Granted By Statute || SC: Special Court Cannot Order Confiscation While Appeal Against Attachment Confirmation is Pending || SC: Photocopies are Not Evidence Unless Conditions for Leading Secondary Evidence are Proved || Calcutta HC: Conviction under Essential Commodities Act Invalid if Stock Measured With a 'Stick' || Kerala High Court: Universities Must Regulate Student Political Activities to Curb Campus Violence || Calcutta HC: Accused Has No Right on Investigation Mode or Impleadment in Probe Writ || Gauhati HC: POCSO Probes Must be Child-Friendly, With Sensitized Investigators to Ensure Clear Truth || Kerala HC: Orders Barring Disclosure of Witness Statements Must State Reasons For Each Witness || SC: Hard to Believe Married Woman Was Lured Into Sex by False Marriage Promise; Case Quashed

Yashpal Raghubir Mertia v. M/s Aura Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. - (Competition Commission of India) (29 Mar 2016)

CCI inundated by real estate complaints

MRTP/ Competition Laws

The Competition Commission of India has over the past few months been inundated by disputes between individuals masquerading as competition concerns. In the latest iteration, it received a complaint from the buyer aggrieved by delayed grant of possession of his flat, unhelpful conduct of the property developer and one-sided ‘discriminatory’ contract terms. The Commission concluded that the complainant had not made out a case of contravention of Section 4 of the Competition Act; besides, in a similar case the previous year the Commission had ruled the property builder to not be dominant in the relevant market in Pune.

Tags : REAL ESTATE DOMINANT INDIVIDUAL DISPUTE

Share :