9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 297X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal because of Covid-19 surge. We have gone through the Application. The Application is allowed. The delay is condoned. Competition Appeal (AT) No. 18 of 2020 2. Heard the Learned Counsel for the Appellant. This Appeal has been filed under Section 53 B of Competition Act, 2002 against the impugned Order of Competition Commission of India (CCI) dated 05th May, 2020 passed under Section 26 (2) of Competition Act in case No. 38 of 2019. 3. The case of the Appellant is that the Appellant filed information with CCI against Respondent No. 2/Kerala Agro Machinery Corporation Ltd. (KAMCO/Opposite Party). The Appellant claimed that it is proprietorship dealing with Agricultural Machinery, based in West Godavari District of Andhra Pradesh. It i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... intervention of CCI. 4. CCI considered the record produced and heard the Respondent No. 2/KAMCO. In Para 17 of the impugned Order, market share of KAMCO has been put on record in a table format which information was supplied by Respondent No. 2 itself. KAMCO claimed that it had not appointed Appellant as exclusive dealer. 5. The Learned Counsel for the Appellant is arguing that the table itself shows that the Respondent No. 2 is major player with regard to concern products of power tiller and reapers. The Respondent abused dominant position by not supplying the goods to the Appellant who was authorised dealer of Respondent No. 2. The Appellant claims that considering the table which has been put on record by the CCI, the Respondent No. 1/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erves the right to appoint its dealers for the Product in the Territory as and when it deems necessary in the interest of the sales of the Products". 26. In fact appointment of more dealers in an area would tend to improve intra-brand competition and ensure wider choice to consumers unless it is shown that an exclusive agreement has certain pro-competitive effects. 27. Secondly, it has been alleged that KAMCO stopped issuing new stock of products to the Informant in an arbitrary manner as a result of which the Informant incurred debt in order to buy new stock from other unauthorised dealers in the market at high rate. However, after examining the information and additional information, the Commission notes that KAMCO had made supply o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cannot be said to raise any anti-competitive concern in the present case. Further, based on facts and evidence on record, it does not appear that KAMCO has indulged in any abusive conduct, so as to warrant any investigation into the same. 30. In view of the foregoing, the Commission is of the opinion that there exists no prima facie case and the information filed is closed herewith under Section 26(2) of the Act." 6. The Respondent No. 1 has considered the material and recorded reason as above for declining to take further action on the information placed on record by the Appellant. 7. Having heard Learned Counsel for the Appellant and going through the record, we also do not find any reason to interfere. Reasoning of CCI appears to b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
