Calcutta HC: Demolition Orders Cannot be Challenged under Article 226 if a Statutory Appeal Exists || Kerala High Court: Disability Pension is Payable to Voluntary Dischargee For Service-Related Illness || Calcutta High Court: Partition Decree is Executable Only After Stamp Duty Payment || Calcutta HC: Contempt Court Cannot Grant New Relief Beyond Original Order Once Compliance is Met || Kerala High Court: Intentional Judicial Decisions Cannot be Altered as Clerical Errors under CPC || Supreme Court: Delay In Filing Appeals under Section 74 of 2013 Land Acquisition Act is Condonable || 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

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 :