News and developments
Competition / Antitrust Law – Year in Review 2023
Case Title: Ultratech Cement Ltd. v. Competition Commission of India & Ors., (W.P.(C) No. 9854/2023)
In a writ petition, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 2022 allowed Builders Association of India (“BAI”) to approach CCI for impleadment as a party (under Regulation 25 of the CCI (General) Regulations, 2009) in cement cartel case. On the basis of application filed by BAI, CCI allowed BAI to participate in the proceedings before the CCI and also allowed BAI to inspect non-confidential records of the case and provided a copy of the DG Report to BAI.
Aggrieved by BAI’s impleadment as a party in the cement cartel proceedings, UltraTech Cement Limited (“UltraTech”) filed a writ petition under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court challenging CCI’s decision to allow the impleadment of BAI in suo motu proceedings initiated regarding alleged cartelisation by cement manufacturers in the country. The main ground for challenge by UltraTech was that if BAI is impleaded as a party, it would have access to commercially sensitive information of UltraTech and that would be detrimental to their commercial interest. UltraTech also challenged CCI’s order of impleading BAI on the grounds that the CCI in passing the order has violated the principles of natural justice by not providing an opportunity of hearing to UltraTech at the time of passing the impleadment order and also that the CCI has not provided sufficient reasons in the impleadment order as to why BAI holds substantial interest in the proceedings.
Vide order dated December 18, 2023, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court dismissed UltraTech’s writ petition and held that as per the impleadment order, BAI is only allowed access to and inspection of the non-confidential version of the case records and therefore the UltraTech’s contention of BAI getting access to the commercially sensitive information is not sustainable. The Court noted that UltraTech was aware of the fact that BAI has been provided with the copies of non-confidential version of the DG report and its response to the same was sought by the CCI. The impleadment order had only formalised the impleadment of BAI. Noting the above the Hon’ble Delhi High Court held that UltraTech had sufficient time of almost a year, to file its objections before the CCI against the impleadment of BAI. Further the Court also held that the CCI had provided sufficient reasons in the order for the impleadment of BAI and noted that any cartelization in the cement industry would largely impact BAI, as its members, collectively are the largest consumers of the cement industry. BAI was represented by Anu Monga and Rahul Goel.
Author: Rahul Goel and Anu Monga
- Madras High Court invokes doctrine of committee of courts and entertainability of writ petition to dismiss writ petitions against impleadment of Builders Association of India in cement cartel case
- Delhi High Court bars the jurisdiction of CCI in examining disputes relating to licensing of patents
- Supreme Court holds that activities of Coal India Limited can be examined under the Competition Act
- Delhi High Court clarified the jurisdiction of CCI in regulating statutory bodies
- NCLAT holds CCI’s order breach Principles of Natural Justice
- NCLAT sets aside the penalty imposed on the ITC by CCI for gun-jumping violations
Author: Rahul Goel and Anu Monga