Back
BIREN VAISHNAV
J. K. Paper Ltd. Through Santosh Wakhloo, Authorized Signatory Herein – Appellant
Versus
Competition Commissioner Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule. Ms. Garima Malhotra, learned advocate waives service of notice of Rule for and on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2.
2. The present petition, in all, challenges four orders passed by the Competition Commission of India (for short, hereinafter referred to as `CCI’). The impugned orders are as under:
(2) Investigation Report dated 7.2.2019 prepared by the Office of the Director General, CCI in case No.30 of 2014 and case No.85 of 2015.
(3) Order dated 4.7.2019 rejecting the request of the petitioner to cross examine the informant of case No.30 of 2014 and informant in case No.85 of 2015.
(4) Orders dated 1.8.2014 and 17.11.2015 by the CCI under Section 26(1) of the Act by which the CCI has directed the Director General to file a joint investiga
An order under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act is administrative, only initiating an investigation without affecting parties' rights.
An error in the decision or determination itself may also be amenable to a writ of certiorari but it must be a manifest error apparent on the face of the proceedings, e.g. when it is based on clear i....
The Competition Commission of India must establish a prima facie case before ordering an investigation; failure to do so renders its orders void.
The judgment establishes that the CCI must have a principled prima facie basis to initiate an investigation under the Competition Act, failing which such directives lack jurisdiction and can be quash....
The CCI's order at the Section 26(1) stage is a preparatory measure and does not require elaborate reasons for clubbing information. The scope of the investigation covers all aspects arising from the....
The court established that a prima facie case of cartelisation can be inferred from parallel pricing among a limited number of suppliers, and that the CCI has the authority to initiate investigations....
The Commission's directive for investigation under Section 26(1) is administrative, requiring no detailed reasons and justifying clubbing of related matters if substantial similarity exists.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
