TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (11) TMI 1969
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d, subject to all just exceptions. Application stands disposed of. LPA 658/2018 1. The present appeal has been filed by the appellant challenging the order dated November 13, 2018 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P. (C) 12129/2018, whereby the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition. The challenge in the writ petition was to an order dated July 05, 2017 passed by the Competition Commission of India (hereinafter 'CCI') under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 (hereinafter 'the Act of 2002'), whereby the Commission has directed the Director General to cause an investigation into the matter and submit an investigation report within 60 days from the receipt of the said order. 2. The appellant has also impugned an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the Act, more so in light of Section 36(2) of the Act of 2002, which expressly conferred with CCI the powers of a Civil Court under the Code of Civil Procedure which includes summoning and enforcing the attendance of any person; and (iii) Regulation 17(2) of the Competition Commission of India (General) Regulations, 2009 in terms of which the Commission is empowered to invite the information provider and such other person as is necessary for a preliminary conference. In substance, it was the submission on behalf of the appellant before the learned Single Judge that it was incumbent upon the CCI to exercise such powers and form a prima facie view after conducting due enquiry. 4. Suffice it to state that the learned Single Judge has in para....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on that the legislature has used the word "direction" to be issued to the Director General for investigation in that provision and not that the Commission shall take a decision or pass an order directing inquiry into the allegations made in the reference to the Commission." 8. The provisions of Section 36 and Regulations 17, 41 and 44 also relate to the powers of the CCI to take evidence and call for information. Clearly, this is not a case where the powers of the CCI are in question. The CCI would have a jurisdiction to exercise its powers in the manner in accordance with provisions of the Act. The contention that it was incumbent upon the CCI to first take evidence under Section 36(2) of the Act or Regulation 41 of the Regulations, is ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....akes it manifestly clear that the Commission must first apply its mind to the material on record, ascertaining the authenticity and accuracy of the material supplied along with the information/reference, before forming a prima facie opinion. According to him, formation of a prima facie opinion is sine qua non for directing the Director General to conduct an investigation. 8. We are not in agreement with the submissions made by Mr. Sethi. On a perusal of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Competition Commission of India (supra), the Supreme Court in paras 21, 38 and 91, has held as under: "21. The informant, i.e. the person who wishes to complain to the Commission constituted under section 1 of the Act, would make such information avail....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d affects a party, i.e. the informant; resultantly, the said party has a right to appeal against such closure of case under Section 26(2) of the Act. On the other hand, mere direction for investigation to one of the wings of the Commission is akin to a departmental proceeding which does not entail civil consequences for any person, particularly, in light of the strict confidentiality that is expected to be maintained by the Commission in terms of Section 57of the Act and Regulation 35 of the Regulations. 91. The jurisdiction of the Commission, to act under this provision, does not contemplate any adjudicatory function. The Commission is not expected to give notice to the parties, i.e. the informant or the affected parties and hear them a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ction to the Director General to cause an investigation into the matter in terms of Section 26(1). 2. This direction under Section 26(1) to the Director General may be passed with or without seeking assistance from any other quarters including experts of eminence or the affected parties themselves. The aggrieved / affected parties cannot claim a right to notice or hearing at this stage. 3. Issuance of a direction by the Commission under Section 26(1) of the Act is a direction simplicitor to cause a investigation and is administrative in nature to one of its own wings departmentally. It does not effectively determine any right or obligation of the parties to the lis. Such direction for investigation to one of the wings of the commission ....