8/8/2019 CCI-SAIL

1/1

rt ...2:20: Cannot appeal against CCI order for investigation itself SC

| 11:53Delhi

vedi

oost to competition spirit in the Indian market, Supreme Court today delivered the first and a land markt no appeal can be filed against an order of Competition Commission of India (CCI) directing investigaeived by it. The judgment came in context of a dispute between Jindal Steel and Power Limited (JSPL)ndia Limited (SAIL) which later turned into virtually a dispute between Competition Commission of India

Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT).mplained against the agreement between SAIL and Indian Railways for exclusive supply of rails allegin

JPSL alleged that although they too manufacture rails Indian Railways buy rails only from SAIL whiCCI, after forming a prima facie opinion on the complaint, directed investigation of the case under sectioon Act. At this stage SAIL moved COMPAT seeking stay on the investigations on the ground that thepassing of the order. The tribunal passed a stay order on 15.02.2010 against investigations maintainingCI is challengeable in COMPAT under Section 53 A (1) of the Act.

major blockade in effective functioning of CCI, Apex Court full bench comprising Chief Justice SH Kapadia,n and Justice Swatanter Kumar held that appeal against investigation by CCI under section 26and that COMPAT had erroneously interpreted Section 53 A(1) of the Competition Act to hold that it had jppeals against any direction issued or decision made by the CCI.holds that it is not mandatory for the commission to issue notice before forming prima facie opinion bu

eems it necessary it may call upon the concerned party(s) to render required assistance.of CCI being a party in an appeal against its own decision the apex court held that in cases whereas taken by the commission, CCI has to be a party and in other cases also CCI shall be a proper party (a

party) in proceedings before the Competition Tribunal.ng the power of CCI the court held that CCI can pass interim orders. The court however stated thateasons while forming a prima facie opinion.the system of disposing complains the court issued guidelines stating that wherever the commissionit should pass a final order in that behalf as expeditiously as possible, and in any case not later thanourt directed that report by Director General should be submitted in not more than 45 days.e concerns of SAIL as to damage or harm to reputation of the entity against which investigations are iheld that confidentially as envisaged under section 57 of the Act should be maintained completely.

on the judgement, Competition Law practice head at Amarchand & Mangaldas & Suresh A. Shroff & Co.This decision saves the CCI from degenerating into merely a post office on the way to the COMPAT. The Supreme Court corrects the balance of power between the CCI and the COMPAT, a balance that had ben of the COMPAT.

mpetition law practitioners led by Pallavi S Shroff of Amarchand Mangaldas, assisted Senior Advocate Harisarguments on behalf of JSPL in the matter. Senior Advocate Rohinton Nariman represented SAIL an

l Subramaniam assisted by Economic Law Practice appeared for CCI.may set the tone of competition law jurisprudence in India and hopefully in a constructive and efficient mground read the news stories

at http://www.lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1855 and http://lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1848

http://www.lawetalnews.com/Newslist.asp?c=2http://www.lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1855http://lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1848http://lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1848http://www.lawetalnews.com/Newslist.asp?c=2http://www.lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1855http://lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1848http://lawetalnews.com/NewsDetail.asp?newsid=1848