2023 Supreme(Del) 3297
NAJMI WAZIRI, VIKAS MAHAJAN
Telefonaktiebolaget Lm Ericsson (publ) – Appellant
Versus
Competition Commission of India – Respondent
Advocates appeared:
Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan, Senior Advocate with Ms. Saya Choudhary Kapur, Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Mr. Vivek Ranjan Tiwary, Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Ms. Vrinda Bagaria, Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Mr. Radhika Pareva, Mr. Munesh Sharma, Mr. Anand S. Pathak, Mr. Shashank Gautam, Ms. Sreemoyee Deb, Mr. Rajat Moudgil, Mr. Ravishekhar Nair, Mr. Sahil Khanna and Mr. Vinayak Goel, Advocates, for the Appellant in LPA 247/2016.
Mr Balbir Singh, ASG with Mr Avinash Sharma, Ms Monica Benjamin, Ms. Anu Sura, Ms. Akanksha Kapoor and Mr. Siddhant Choudhary, Advocates, for the CCI in LPA 247/2016, LPA 550/2016, LPA 246/2016 & W.P.(C) 8379/2015.
Mr. J. Sai Deepak and Mr. Avinash K. Sharma, Advocate, for the Respondent-2 (INTEX) in LPA 247/2016.
Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, Mr. C.M. Lall and Mr. Raj Shekhar Rao, Senior Advocates with Mr. Adarsh Ramanujan, Ms. Bitika Sharma, Mr Aman Sethi, Mr. Lakshay Kaushik, Mr. Luv Virmani, Mr. H.S. Sandhu, Ms. Mansi Sood, Mr. Skanda Shekhar and Mr. Areeb Amanullah, Advocates, for the Petitioner in LPA 150/2020.
Mr. N. Venkatraman, ASG with Mr. Samar Bansal, Mr. Madhav Gupta and Mr. Vedant Kapur, Advocates, for the CCI in LPA 150/2020.
Mr. Ruchir Mishra and Mr. Mukesh Kr. Tiwari, Advocates, for the UOI in LPA 150/2020.
Mr. Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Senior Advocate with Ms. Saya Choudhary Kapur, Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Mr. Vivek Ranjan Tiwary, Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Ms. Vrinda Bagaria, Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Mr. Radhika Pareva, Mr. Sajan Shankar Prasad, Mr. Munesh Sharma, Mr. Swarnil Dey, Mr. Shaurya Pandey, Mr. Anand S. Pathak, Mr. Shashank Gautam, Ms. Sreemoyee Deb, Mr. Rajat Moudgil, Mr. Ravishekhar Nair and Mr. Sahil Khanna, Advocates, for the Respondent in LPA 550/2016.
Mr. Sajan Poovayya, Senior Advocate with Ms. Saya Choudhary Kapur, Mr. Ashutosh Kumar, Mr. Vivek Ranjan Tiwary, Mr. Vinod Chauhan, Ms. Vrinda Bagaria, Mr. Palash Maheshwari, Mr. Radhika Pareva, Mr. Munesh Sharma, Mr. Anand S. Pathak, Mr. Shashank Gautam, Ms. Sreemoyee Deb, Mr. Rajat Moudgil, Mr. Ravishekhar Nair, Mr. Sahil Khanna, Ms. Raksha Agarwal and Mr. Abhishek Kakker, Advocates, for the Petitioner in LPA 246/2016 & W.P.(C) 8379/2015.
JUDGMENT
Najmi Waziri, J. These are four appeals and a Writ Petition that, in their essence, raise a common question of far-reaching implications - when a patent is issued in India, and the patentee asserts such rights, can the Competition Commission of India ("CCI") inquire into the actions of such patentee in exercise of its powers under the Competition Act, 2002 ("Competition Act"). One of the Appeals - LPA/550/2016 is by the CCI itself.
WHAT THE PROCEEDINGS IMPUGN
2. LPA/246/2016 and LPA/247/2016 are by Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson (Publ) ("Ericsson"). They both impugn a common judgement dated 30.3.2016 ("2016 Judgement") which dismissed two writ petitions1[WP(C) 464/2014 and WP(C) 1006/2014], filed by Ericsson, one against CCI and Micromax Informatics Limited ("Micromax"), and another against Intex Technologies (India) Limited ("Intex"). Micromax and Intex had inter alia complained that Ericsson was imposing conditions for licensing certain standard essential patents ("SEP") in the field of telecommunications that are not fair, reasonable or non-discriminatory, and thus in violation of sections 3 and/or 4 of the Competition Act. The 2016 judgement held that there is no lega
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
