Sports organizations deemed enterprises under Competition Act despite non-commercial nature, WhatsApp restrictions on players violate Section 4(2)

CCI found sports organizations qualified as enterprises under Competition Act, 2002, regardless of non-commercial nature, applying functional rather than formal approach. Commission held WhatsApp message restricting players from joining non-affiliated clubs and restrictive MoA clauses prima facie violated Section 4(2) provisions regarding abuse of dominant position. CCI directed DG investigation and granted interim injunction restraining organizations from restricting players' participation in non-recognized tournaments or threatening participants in such events.

---

---

Issues Involved:

1. Alleged contravention of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 by the Opposite Parties (OPs).
2. Determination of whether the Opposite Parties qualify as an "enterprise" under the Competition Act, 2002.
3. Examination of alleged anti-competitive conduct and abuse of dominant position by the Opposite Parties.
4. Consideration of interim relief to the Informant.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Alleged Contravention of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002:

The Informant, TT Friendly Super League Association, alleged that the Opposite Parties, namely The Suburban Table Tennis Association, Maharashtra State Table Tennis Association, and Table Tennis Federation of India, engaged in anti-competitive practices violating Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002. The Commission observed that the Opposite Parties were involved in activities that prima facie appeared to restrict players from participating in non-affiliated tournaments, thereby denying market access to players and organizers. Such conduct was noted as potentially violating Section 4(2)(c) of the Act.

2. Determination of Whether the Opposite Parties Qualify as an "Enterprise":

The Commission addressed the preliminary objection raised by OP-1, claiming it was not an "enterprise" under Section 2(h) of the Act. The Commission clarified that the definition of "enterprise" includes entities engaged in economic activities, regardless of profit motives. The activities of the Opposite Parties, such as organizing tournaments and generating revenue through sponsorships and fees, brought them within the purview of an "enterprise" under the Act.

3. Examination of Alleged Anti-Competitive Conduct and Abuse of Dominant Position:

The Commission assessed the relevant market as the "market for organization of table tennis leagues/events/tournaments in India" and noted the pyramidal structure of the Opposite Parties governing the sport from district to national levels. The WhatsApp message from OP-1's General Secretary restricting players from participating in non-affiliated tournaments was considered an abuse of dominant position under Section 4(2)(c). Additionally, certain clauses of OP-3's Memorandum of Association were found to be restrictive and unfair, potentially violating Sections 4(2)(a)(i) and 4(2)(b)(i) of the Act.

4. Consideration of Interim Relief to the Informant:

The Informant sought interim relief to prevent the Opposite Parties from restricting players from participating in its friendly events. The Commission, applying the principles for granting interim relief, found that the conditions for such relief were met. The Commission restrained OP-1 from issuing communications that dissuade players from joining non-affiliated tournaments and directed OP-1 to comply with these instructions until further orders. The Commission emphasized that this interim order does not reflect a final opinion on the case's merits and directed the Director General to conduct an unbiased investigation.

In conclusion, the Commission identified prima facie evidence of anti-competitive conduct by the Opposite Parties, necessitating an investigation and interim measures to protect the interests of players and maintain competitive practices in the sport of table tennis.

---