Res judicata in anti-profiteering proceedings barred reopening the same project, period and respondent after prior final adjudication.

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Res judicata barred a fresh anti-profiteering complaint concerning the same project, same respondent and same period because profiteering in "Migsun Wynn" had already been investigated by the DGAP, finally adjudicated by the NAA, and affirmed by the Delhi High Court. The Tribunal held that the complainant's alleged profiteering was already included in the earlier quantified amount, so reopening the same cause of action would create parallel proceedings and amount to abuse of process. As the complaint was also withdrawn, the proceedings were held not maintainable, no fresh investigation was required, and the DGAP was directed to take no further action.....