TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court upholds High Court decision, dismisses Special Leave Petitions, grants extension for Competition Commission notice.</h1> <h3>FLIPKART INTERNET PRIVATE LIMITED Versus COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA & ORS.</h3> The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions challenging the High Court's decision, upholding the dismissal of the Writ Appeals by the ... Maintainability of SLP - HELD THAT:- There are no reason to interfere with the impugned orders passed by the High Court of Karnataka dismissing the Writ Appeals of the petitioners. The Special Leave Petitions are, accordingly, dismissed. Issues:- Petitioner's appeal against the High Court's decision- Extension of time to reply to notice by the Competition Commission of IndiaAnalysis:The Supreme Court, comprising Hon'ble the Chief Justice, Hon'ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran, and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant, heard the matter through video conferencing. Mr. Gopal Subramanium, representing the petitioner in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11615/2021, and Dr. A.M. Singhvi, representing the petitioner in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.11558 of 2021, along with the learned Solicitor General for the Respondent - Competition Commission of India, presented their arguments. After careful consideration of the available material on record, the Court found no grounds to interfere with the impugned orders issued by the High Court of Karnataka, which dismissed the Writ Appeals of the petitioners. Consequently, the Special Leave Petitions were dismissed by the Court, and all pending applications in the matters were disposed of as a result of the dismissal.Regarding the extension of time requested by Dr. A.M. Singhvi, the learned Senior counsel, to reply to the notice issued by the Office of the Director General, Competition Commission of India, the Court granted an extension of four weeks from the current date. However, it was explicitly stated that no further extension of time would be provided for this purpose. This decision was made in consideration of the request put forth by the petitioner's counsel, ensuring a reasonable period for the petitioner to respond to the notice within the specified timeframe.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
