JUDGMENT

Ruma Pal, J.-The appellant has challenged the order of the Commission set up under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (referred to as the Act) by which the Commission held it had the jurisdiction to entertain the respondent s claim for compensation under Section 12 B of the Act against the appellant and the respondent No.2.

2. The appellant carries on its business of manufacturing printing machines in Germany. It was incorporated under German Law and has its registered office at Offenbach, Main, Germany. The respondent No.1 and the respondent No.2 have their registered offices at Mumbai.

3. Pursuant to the agreement a printing machine was sold to the respondent No.1 by the appellant. The machine was shipped by the appellant from Germany to Mumbai on 16th June 1994. It was off-loaded at Mumbai on 5th August 1994 and cleared by the respondent No.1 from the customs warehouse on 22nd April 1997.

4. In November, 1997 the respondent No.1 filed two applications before the Commission viz. Unfair Trade Practices Enquiry (UTPE) No. 388 of 1997 in effect complaining of unfair trade practices by the appellant and the respondent No.2 relating to the supply of the prin