Supreme Court: Vacancies From Resignations under CUSAT Act Must Follow Communal Rotation || Supreme Court: Forest Land Cannot Be Leased or Used For Agriculture Without Centre’s Approval || Supreme Court: Gravity of Offence and Accused’s Role Must Guide Suspension of Sentence under CrPC || Supreme Court: Arbitral Awards Cannot be Set Aside For Mere Legal Errors or Misreading of Evidence || SC Acknowledges Child Trafficking as a Grave Reality and Issues Guidelines to Assess Victim Evidence || Allahabad HC: When Parties Extend an Agreement by Conduct, The Arbitration Clause Extends Too || Supreme Court: Issues of Party Capacity and Maintainability Must Be Decided by Arbitral Tribunal || Supreme Court: Omissions in Chief Examination Can Be Rectified During Cross-Examination || Supreme Court: Items Given by Accused to Police Are Not Section 27 Recoveries under Evidence Act || Gujarat High Court: Waqf Institutions Must Pay Court Fees When Filing Disputes in State Tribunal

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 :