Comp Law
Comp Law
The Parliament of India passed the Competition Act, 2002 on January 13, 2003,
which repealed the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. It
came into force on March 31st, 2003. The Competition Act, 2002 was changed
twice after its enactment, with the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007 and the
Competition (Amendment) Act, 2009. It was a result of India’s drive for
globalisation and economic liberalisation. The primary goal of the Act is to
control the anti-competitive behaviour of a firm or company that has a negative
impact on competition in India’s market. Furthermore, the Act seeks to
encourage and maintain market competition, safeguard the interests of
consumers, and safeguard market freedom in our country.
The Competition Act, 2002, was adopted in India to achieve the dual goals of
regulating anti-competitive conduct and lending support to the agreements of
the World Trade Organisation (WTO). The Act also establishes the Competition
Commission of India (CCI) as a market controller for stopping and controlling
anti-competitive behaviour in the country. It also establishes the Competition
Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT), a quasi-judicial authority formed to listen to and
decide on appeals against any direction issued or decision taken by the CCI.
The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act of 1969 (MRTP Act) was the
first competition law established in India. The MRTP Act came into effect on
June 1st, 1970, with the goal of ensuring that the functioning of the market
structure did not result in the concentration of the economy in a few hands. It
also prohibited monopolistic and discriminatory acts that are harmful to the
public at large.
Economic liberalisation and the abolition of the MRTP Act in 1991
The Indian Parliament enacted the Competition Act in 2002 to govern the
anti-competitive behaviour of firms in the Indian market. It was introduced to
avoid behaviours that have an Appreciable Adverse Effect on Competition
(AAEC). The goal of the Competition Act, 2002 is to develop and preserve an
open, just, competitive, and creative environment that will protect the interests
of consumers and foster long-term economic progress in the nation.
According to the Act, MRTP has become outdated and unnecessary as a result of
worldwide economic trends. Hence, there is a need to switch from ‘curtailing
monopolies’ to ‘supporting competition’.
The Competition Act, 2002 was modified by the Competition (Amendment) Act
2007, which came into effect on May 20, 2009, when the Indian government
notified some sections of the Competition Act relating to anti-competitive
agreements and abuse of dominant positions.
After three more years, in June 2011, certain provisions related to acquisition
control came into force.
Meaning The MRTP Act is India’s The Competition Act, 2002 was
first competition law, established to encourage and
consisting of laws and maintain economic competition
regulations that govern and protect commercial liberty.
discriminatory market
practices.
The Competition Act is concerned with enforcing rules to ensure that firms and
corporations compete effectively with one another. This promotes
entrepreneurship and productivity, increases customer choices and helps reduce
prices and enhance quality.
1. Low prices: Offering a lower price is the easiest approach for a firm to
achieve a large market share. Prices are driven down in a competitive
market. This is not simply beneficial to consumers; where more people
can afford to buy items, it motivates firms to produce and helps the
economy as a whole.
2. Innovation: To develop high-quality products, firms must be
innovative in their product concepts, design, manufacturing processes,
services, and so on.
3. Better quality: The Competition Act encourages firms to enhance the
quality of their goods and services in order to attract more consumers
and extend their customer base. Quality can refer to a variety of
things, including items that last longer or perform better, better
after-sales or technical advice, and better service.
4. More options: In a competitive market, firms will seek to differentiate
their products from the competition. As a result, consumers have more
options, allowing them to choose the product that provides the most
value for money.
The following are some of the main features of the Competition Act:
1. Anti-competitive agreements
2. Abuse of the dominant position
3. Combinations and their regulation
4. The Competition Commission of India
Anti-Competitive Agreements
Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 makes it illegal to enter into any
agreement pertaining to the manufacturing, sale, transport, warehousing,
purchasing, or management of goods and services that has or is likely to have
an adverse effect on the market in India. Section 3(2) further specifies that any
agreement entered into in contravention of this provision is null and void.
Horizontal Agreements
Section 3(3) of the Competition Act, 2002 talks about horizontal agreements.
These are agreements between two or more business entities working at the
same level of production and distribution. Under the Competition Act, some
forms of horizontal agreements are deemed to have an appreciable adverse
effect on competition in India. This assumption does not suggest that all
horizontal agreements are always anti-competitive; the companies involved in
such a contract must produce proof that their contract will not have an
appreciable adverse effect on competition.
An example of horizontal agreement is when two manufacturers of a particular
commodity fix the price of their commodity.
Some horizontal agreements that are prohibited under the Competition Act,
2002 are as follows:
Vertical Agreements
Section 3(4) of the Competition Act, 2002 talks about vertical agreements.
These are the agreements formed between firms or individuals at various levels
or tiers of the manufacturing chain. Vertical agreements are normally allowed
unless it has been proven that they create, or are likely to induce, an
appreciable adverse effect on competition in the Indian markets. The
Competition Act contains an inclusive list of vertical agreements that may be
banned based on their impact on competition situations in India.
For example, an agreement between a producer and a supplier that has the
ability to affect competition in the market can be termed a vertical agreement.
Various vertical agreements permitted under the Competition Act, 2002 are as
follows:
● Tie-in agreement
● Exclusive supply agreement
● Exclusive distribution agreement
● Refusal to deal
● Maintenance of resale prices
The Competition Act provides for the formation of a CCI. It acts as the regulator
of competition in the Indian market. The commission was founded in 2003, but
it did not become fully operational until 2009. The central government appoints
a chairman and six members to the CCI. It is the commission’s responsibility to
eradicate anti-competitive activities, encourage and maintain competition,
safeguard consumer rights, and guarantee free trade in India’s marketplaces. It
is a quasi-judicial body tasked with the following duties:
The Competition Act established the CCI, which is entirely responsible for the
application and enforcement of the Competition Act. The CCI currently has six
members and one chairperson, Ashok Kumar Gupta. The CCI can start an
investigation into an anti-competitive agreement or abuse of dominance on its
own, based on facts or evidence in its possession, or upon receiving information
or a recommendation from the state or legal authority. Anyone, including
customers and other organisations, can register a complaint or provide details
on anti-competitive agreements and misuse of dominant positions. In the case
of mergers and acquisitions, the CCI may initiate an investigation by itself or
based on information from the enterprises intending to merge. The CCI and its
inquiry team are vested with broad investigative powers with regard to
anti-competitive practices, such as the power to summon and administer the
participation of any individual, investigate them under oath, and receive
evidence on affidavit, as well as other similar powers. If CCI believes that there
is a prima facie case, it shall instruct the Director General to conduct an
investigation and submit its conclusions. The Director General is also authorised
to conduct police raids as part of its inquiry. The CCI may depend on the
recommendations of the Director General in its investigation and after providing
the accused parties with a reasonable chance to be heard. After this, they can
issue any measures they deem proper, such as an instruction to cease and
desist and impose fines. The Competition Act provides for an appeal to the
Competition Appellate Tribunal against some of the CCI rulings. A further appeal
from the COMPAT judgement may be filed with the Supreme Court of India.