2018 (1) TMI 1754

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tly held that the earlier order dated 31st August passed in Case No. 48 of 2016 for same sets of allegation is not maintainable against the same opposite parties and rightly closed the application under Section 26(2) of the Act. Conclusion - A second application on the same facts is not maintainable without new substantial evidence; dominance in a market requires more than a high market share if significant competitors are present. There are no ground to interfere with the impugned order - appeal dismissed.
JUSTICE S.J. MUKHOPADHAYA CHAIRPERSON AND JUSTICE BANSI LAL BHAT MEMBER (JUDICIAL) For the Appellant: Mr. K.K Sharma, Mr. Bunmeet Singh, Ms. Anubha Dhulia, Mr. S.P. Roy and Mr. Sanchit, Advocates. For the Respondent : None ORDER T .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... the record we find that the 'Informant' alleged the Agreement reached between the parties has following anti-competitive clauses: * Clause 1 - if the Informant is unable to pay the consideration within time, she will be liable to pay interest @ 1.50% per month or part thereof on the amount outstanding and in case the payment (consideration plus interest) is not made within 90 days of its accrual, then OP-1 shall have the option to cancel the present Agreement entered between the parties. * Clause 5 -If OP-1 is unable to complete the work within stipulated time, then OP-1 shall be liable to pay the balance of Rs. 18,15,000/- at the time of completion of the project. In this regard, the Informant alleged that as per agreement though the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 140 acres No Completed 3 Eldeco City Eldeco Group 133 acres No Completed 4 Emaar MGF Greens Gomti Emmar MGF Over 100 acres Health Centre Ongoing 5 DLF Garden City DLF 30 acres Medical Facilities Ongoing 6. Taking into consideration the aforesaid fact, the Commission held as follows: "In view of above explanation provided in Case No. 48/2016, the Commission opines that due to presence of several significant and major real estate developers, such as, Ansal, Eldeco, Sahara, Omaxe, Unitech, etc. in the market for, "the provision of services for development and sale of plots of land for providing medical facilities in Lucknow District of Uttar Pradesh", OPs do not appear to be dominant in the relevant market either indiv .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X