9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (5) TMI 935 - AT - Companies LawAnti-competitive conduct by various bidders in supply and installation of signages at specified locations of State Bank of India across India - bid-rigging and cartelisation in the tender floated by SBI Infra Management Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (SBIIMS) - Section 19(1) of the Competition Act, 2002 - HELD THAT - There is no force in the argument of counsel for the Appellant insofar as she has submitted that two emails dated 02.06.2018 and 04.06.2018 cannot be relied upon against the company as well as the Director because the said emails are coming from the other party and neither the company nor the Director has copied the email or part of the email. This argument cannot be accepted because at that time, there was not a whisper that ultimately this matter is going to be taken in its Suo Motu jurisdiction by the Commission for the purpose of finding out as to whether there has been a cartel of the bidders which is contrary to the provisions of the Act and, therefore, the role ascribed to Manish Jodhavat has been thoroughly discussed in Para 77 to 92 of the impugned order with which we are totally satisfied that the company as well as Manish Jodhavat was somehow or the other were involved and, therefore, the conclusion drawn by the Commission cannot be faulted. There are no merit in the present appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.
Issues Involved:
1. Alleged anti-competitive conduct by various bidders. 2. Role of OP-7 in the bid-rigging and cartelization. 3. Appellant's involvement and evidence against them. 4. Conclusion and findings by the Commission. Summary: 1. Alleged anti-competitive conduct by various bidders: This appeal challenges the order dated 03.02.2022 by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) regarding the alleged anti-competitive conduct by various bidders in the supply and installation of signages at specified locations of State Bank of India (SBI) across India. The CCI initiated Suo Motu proceedings under Section 19(1) of the Competition Act, 2002, based on a complaint about bid-rigging and cartelization in the tender floated by SBI Infra Management Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (SBIIMS). 2. Role of OP-7 in the bid-rigging and cartelization: The Commission investigated the role of OP-7 (Hith Impex Pvt. Ltd.) and its Director, Mr. Manish Jodhavat, in the bid-rigging scheme. The investigation revealed that Mr. Jodhavat provided crucial inputs for the rigged pricing, as evidenced by emails dated 02.06.2018 and 04.06.2018. Despite OP-7's claims that the findings were based on hearsay and lacked documentary evidence, the Commission noted Mr. Jodhavat's significant role in influencing the bid prices and the overall bid manipulation process. The Commission concluded that OP-7 was part of the arrangement to geographically allocate the market and rig the bids, violating Section 3(1) read with Section 3(3) of the Act. 3. Appellant's involvement and evidence against them: The Appellant argued that they were not involved in the final bidding process and were merely suppliers of 'Vinyl' and 'Flex' to OP-4. They contended that the emails referencing Mr. Jodhavat did not suffice to establish their involvement in the cartel. However, the Commission found substantial evidence, including depositions and email correspondence, indicating OP-7's active participation in the bid-rigging scheme. The Commission noted that OP-7 submitted applications in response to the EOI published by SBIIMS and was involved in the tender process, contrary to their claims. 4. Conclusion and findings by the Commission: The Commission concluded that the definition of an 'agreement' under Section 2(b) of the Act includes any tacit understanding or action in concert, even without formal documentation. It determined that OP-7 and Mr. Jodhavat were involved in the cartel based on the preponderance of probabilities. Consequently, the Commission found OP-7 guilty of contravening Sections 3(3)(c) and 3(3)(d) read with Section 3(1) of the Act. The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, upholding the Commission's findings and rejecting the Appellant's arguments. Final Decision: The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Commission's order and the penalties imposed on OP-7 and its Director.
|
