9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (10) TMI 1081X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CM APPL. 15341/2014 in W.P.(C) 6362/2014 Allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.(C) 6361/2014 & CM APPL. 15337/2014 W.P.(C) 6362/2014 & CM APPL. 15340/2014 1. Present writ petitions have been filed seeking a direction to respondent No.1-CCI to frame and decide the issue of jurisdiction prior to passing of orders on merits of the cases and deferring the matters until final adjudication by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeals Nos. 6328, 6451 and 6487 of 2014 involving the same jurisdictional issue. 2. Both the learned senior counsel for petitioner submitted that respondent no. 1-CCI ought to have determined the question of jurisdiction before fixing the hearing on merits. They stated that, in fact, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ror. We will deal with this aspect in the latter part of the judgment, when we deal with the appeals filed by the Appellant against the subsequent orders passed by the CCI suggesting the ideal clauses in the ABA, but suffice it to say at this juncture, that the CCI could not have examined all these clauses, which were valid at the time when the ABA was enacted in December 2006-07 and viewed the abuse on the part of the Appellant on that count alone. We have already shown that both sections 3 and 4 of the Act were not available on the day when these agreements were executed..............." 3. They also pointed out that respondent no. 1-CCI had also filed an application for clarification before the Supreme Court seeking stay of the observat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... apartments namely - Belaire, Park Place and Magnolia, the buyers/ allottees complained of imposition of unfair and discriminatory conditions by the action of the Appellant against themselves and this imposition was stated to be after 20th May, 2009. If that is so, then the CCI certainly has the duty and jurisdiction to take into account such impositions. Therefore, even if we do not find any justification on the part of CCI to look into and consider the ABAs, which were dated way back in 2006/2007, we do feel that the complaints about the breach of section 4 of the Act could be and were rightly entertained by the CCI, particularly of those impositions, which were post 20th May, 2009. 77. .............On the basis of this reasoning, we a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... before the Apex Court at the time of admission of the aforesaid Civil Appeals. 8. This Court is also of the opinion that present writ petitions have been filed to prevent the respondent no. 1-CCI from passing orders on merits. The intent of the petitioner in filing the present writ petitions is to get the issue of jurisdiction decided against them and then to challenge it by way of writ petitions and to ensure that in the meantime matters are not heard on merits. 9. This Court is confident that the respondent no. 1-CCI would deal with all the arguments advanced by petitioner while finally deciding the matters. In any event, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the final decision of respondent no. 1-CCI, it shall be at liberty to challenge th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
