TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (1) TMI 1756
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Competition<br>JUSTICE S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA CHAIRPERSON AND JUSTICE A.I.S. CHEEMA) (BALVINDER SINGH MEMBER (JUDICIAL) MEMBER (TECHNICAL) For the Appellant: Mr. Manish Vashist, Mr. Manish Palilwal and Mr. Manashwy Jha Advocates For Respondents: Mr. Nakul Mohta, Advocate ORDER This Review Application has been preferred by Competition Commission of India (hereinafter referred to as 'Commission') ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oresaid reads as follows: "This appeal filed against order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the Competition Commission of India (for short, 'the Commission') in Case No. 71 of 2913 is illustrative of how the appellants have become victim of rivalry between different factions of Karnataka Chemists and Druggists Association (Respondent No. 3) and they have been penalized by the Commission under Section....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... aggrieved persons have moved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in appeal. If that be so, we are of the view that the appellants and respondents both sides will be governed by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as may be rendered. No further decision is required to be rendered in this appeal." .... Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Commission submitted that by judgment dated 28t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ounsel appearing on behalf of Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association. From the order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the Commission in case No. 71/2013, which was under challenge, it is clear that the Commission on perusal of the records has come to a definite conclusion that there was anti-competitive arrangement/understanding between M/s Lupin Ltd and Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association. ....