AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (12) TMI 980
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 'CCI') in Case No.73/2014. By the impugned order the CCI held that contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act was not established in the case hence the case was ordered to be closed under Section 26(6) of the Act. 2. The appellant earlier had filed an information application under Section 19 of the Act to the CCI alleging therein that several clauses of the agreement which was entered into between the appellant and Respondent No.2 in the present appeal were violative of provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) of the ACT. It was alleged by the informant that Respondent No.1 being public limited company was involved in the business of residential, commercial and retail properties. The project under reference was launched by DLF Home Developers Ltd, a wholly owned subsidiary of Respondent No.1. 3. As per information application the Respondent group launched a residential township in the name of 'Regal Garden' in Sector 90, DLF Garden City, Gurgaon consisting of 3 and 4 BHK apartment units. The informant applied for allotment of an apartment -flat in the said Project and paid 10% of the sale price of the apartment and parking space amounting to Rs.859850/- as booking amoun....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rector General (DG) to conduct investigation and submit report. The said order was passed under Section 26(1) of the Act. In compliance with the order of the CCI, the DG conducted investigation and during investigation DG found violation of Section 4 of the Act by the Respondents and thereafter DG report was submitted on 16.8.2016. Though in the DG report specific case of violation of the provisions of the Act against the Respondents was established, to the reasons best known to the CCI, by its order dated 9.11.2016 CCI directed for further investigation and subsequently the DG conducted supplementary investigation and submitted its report on 8.9.2017. 8. In the supplementary investigation report though the DG noticed involvement of the respondents but taking U-Turn concluded that "Ops as a group was found to be having financial strength, however, the same does not appear to bestow a position of strength to the OP group". After submission of the supplementary investigation report Learned CCI had passed the impugned order. 9. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant that the order impugned is liable to be set aside since the order is based on its supplementary....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... would tantamount to committing serious breach of agreement/settlement or out of court settlement, and the appellant shall have no other alternative but to adopt due course of law as may be advised in law. (Annexed at page no 12 &13 of rejoinder) 6. It is submitted that the appellant was therefore constrained to issue an e-mail dt 9.10.2018 saying that R-1 & R-2 have neglected and failed to discharge their duty, even after promising under the settlement dt 10.07.2018. The said settlement is breached by R-1 & R-2 and it is pertinent to mention here that the settlement deed dt 10.7.2018 is part and parcel of settlement dt 17.03.2017 (para 8 of settlement dated 10.07.2018. This is further evident from the fact that in the deed dated 10.07.2018 it is mentioned that the "appellant will pay double the amount of deed dated 17.03.2017 in case of any breach on his part. It clearly established that both settlements are considered as One and non-compliance the terms of settlement deed by R-1/2, give liberty to appellant to invoke his due rights (Annexed at Page No.14 and 15 of rejoinder). It is further submitted that only after reply dated 26.11.2018 filed by R1/R2 and rejoinder ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the fundamental rights. It is clear that R1/2 clearly admitted that they breached the terms of settlement and by virtue of their this act, appellant has the necessary right to have filed the present appeal. 9. It is to be noted that information filed before the Ld. CCI under competition law is not appellant/ individual centric but it is for the mass benefit of a larger group. Respondent nos. 1 & 2 should offer exit/buy back option along with l1% interest to all DLF Garden City, Gurgaon home buyers who wish to exit due to unfair clauses imposed by R-1 8& 2 (this fact is well established in the DG report where 12 out of 14 clauses are arbitrary, abusive) from the said project as the same way respondent nos. 1& 2 gave an option to the Appellant herein. 10. It is submitted that the decision rendered by Hon 'ble COMPAT in the case titled as Ravinder Kaur Sethi Vs DLF Universal Limited and Others is on facts not applicable to the present case, even otherwise it says that "contractual breaches do not ordinarily give rise to a completion law issue", it has not said that it can't be risen under the Circumstances or facts of different cases. Other case laws i.e.,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r). 13. It appears that during the course of investigation, the Director General clarified that the residential units means; apartment/ flat/independent floors villas under the licensed category. It is respectfully submitted that explanation rewording of the relevant product market does not change the subject in view of the doctrine of interchangeable or substitutable by the Consumer by reason of characteristics of the product or services. For example, a consumer proposing to buy a flat may opt for RGH or RPL on account of locational advantage; budget etc. however the Ld. CCI by an order dated 09,11.2016, in terms recalled its earlier order determining relevant product market and substituted the relevant product market already determined earlier by an order dated 04.02.2015 and determining an entirely different product market, that is reproduced herein "Provision of service for development and sale of residential apartments/flat in Gurgaon". Such an action was beyond the scope of the authority of Ld. CCI. 14. In view of the facts above- said, the report dt 18.03.2016 submitted by the Director General after a detailed and full-fledged investigation may be restored ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....and against the Respondents." 10. Mr. Avishkar Singhvi, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the CCI opposing the appeal submits that there is no infirmity in the impugned order. According to him the order impugned assigned detailed reasons and after examining each and every aspect the Learned CCI has come to the conclusion that in the present case allegation of the informant against Respondent No.1 and 2 for violation of provisions under the Act was not established. According to him the Learned CCI has rightly passed the order which was within its jurisdiction under Section 26(6) of the Act which requires no interference. 11. Learned counsel for the CCI has also referred to number of paragraphs of the impugned order to satisfy that CCI after applying its mind assigning a detailed reason has passed order which requires no interference. 12. Mr. Pravin Bahadur, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of Respondent No.1 and 2. He adopting the argument advanced by learned counsel for the CCI has argued that the appeal is fit to be rejected primarily on the ground that the appellant has not approached this Tribunal with clean hands. It was submitted that the appellant has supp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... found involved in violation of the Act. It noticed in its order dated 04.02.2015 following facts, which are from running Page 154 onwards of Rejoinder i.e. paras 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12:- 8. The Commission perused the information available on record and heard the Informant at length. At the outset it may be noted that the Commission has already received many informations where OP 1 has been prima facie found to be dominant in market for 'provision of services for development of residential apartments in the territory of Gurgaon'. The allegations raised in this case are reasonably similar to those informations. The Informant is aggrieved by the onesided and onerous conditions imposed in the 'Agreement' by OP 2 which as per the Informant has resulted in abuse of dominant position by OPs in the relevant market. 9. The relevant market proposed by the Informant is market for 'service of mid-tier residential accommodation in upscale self-contained township in Gurgaon'. However, the Informant has not provided any cogent reasoning as to why mid-tier residential accommodation should be taken as relevant product market in this case. Considering the previous orders of the Commi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....cluded that OPs were a group said to violated the provisions of Section 4(2)(a)(i) read with Section 19(4) of the Competition Act, 2002. Even though DG in its investigation report dated 18.03.2016 noticed the violation committed by Respondents under Section 4 of the Act, by its order dated 09.11.2016 the CCI directed the DG to conduct further investigation. The operative portion of order dated 9.11.2016 is reproduced below: "On a careful perusal of the DG report, the Commission is of opinion that before proceeding any further in the present matter, it would be appropriate to direct the DG in terms of the provisions contained in Regulation 20(6) of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009 to conduct further investigation in light of the observations made hereinabove. Accordingly, the DG is directed to make further investigation and submit a supplementary report within a period of 45 days from the receipt of this order." 17. Thereafter the DG conducted further investigation and concluded as follows: "7.14 Hence, the investigation came out with conclusion that the Ops as a group was found to be having higher financial strength, however, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct, the Commission shall invite objections or suggestions from the Central Government or the State Government or the statutory authority or the parties concerned, as the case may be, on such report of the Director General. (6) If, after consideration of the objections or suggestions referred to in sub-section (5), if any, the Commission agrees with the recommendation of the Director General, it shall close the matter forthwith and pass such orders as it deems fit and communicate its order to the Central Government or the State Government or the statutory authority or the parties concerned, as the case may be. (7) If, after consideration of the objections or suggestions referred to in sub-section (5), if any, the Commission is of the opinion that further investigation is called for, it may direct further investigation in the matter by the Director General or cause further inquiry to be made in the matter or itself proceed with further inquiry in the matter in accordance with the provisions of this Act. (8) If the report of the Director General referred to in sub-section (3) recommends that there is contravention of any of the provisions of this Act, and th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Commission which ordinarily shall not exceed sixty days from the date of receipt of the directions of the Commission [***]. (3) The Commission may, on an application made by the Director-General giving sufficient reasons, extend the time for submission of the report by such period as it may consider reasonable. (4) The report of the Director-General shall contain his findings together with all evidences or documents or statements or analyses collected during the investigation. Provided that when considered necessary, the Director General may, for maintain confidentiality, submit his report in two parts. One of the parts shall contain the documents to which access to the parties may be accorded and another part shall contain confidential and commercially sensitive information and documents to which access may be partially or totally restricted. (5) Ten copies of the report of the Director-General, along with a soft copy in document format, shall be forwarded to the Secretary within the time specified by the Commission: Provided that the Secretary may ask for more copies of the report as and when required. (6) If the Commission, on co....