India: The Fixation With Fixing Resale Prices

Last Updated: 2 October 2017
Article by Prerna Parashar

Under the Indian Competition Act, Resale Price Maintenance (RPM) is defined under Section 3(4) (e) of the Act as including any agreement to sell goods on the condition that the prices to be charged on the resale by the purchaser shall be the prices stipulated by the seller unless it is clearly stated that prices lower than those prices may be charged.

Also known as vertical price fixing, RPM refers to agreements or practices among enterprises at different levels in a distribution channel, wherein an enterprise decides the resale price at which a product or service must be sold by a distributor. As a vertical intra-brand restraint, RPM governs the resale price of products or services of a particular manufacturer. RPM, in its usual form, is the practice of setting a price floor, below which sales cannot occur, as in the case of minimum resale price maintenance. In its classic formulation, RPM is the act of directly controlling the retail transaction price for the manufacturer's products. However, RPM may also be accomplished through some programs under which a manufacturer unilaterally announces its recommended retail prices and stops dealing with retailers that do not follow its suggestions.

CCI's adjudication on RPM

The CCI has adjudicated on the concept of RPM, through three decided judgments.

The first was in the case of M/s Esys Information Technologies Pvt. Ltd. v. Intel Corporation & Anr1 . In this case, the Informant (a distributor) alleged that Intel was a dominant enterprise that inter-alia indulged in the practice of RPM. The CCI however recorded that the mere monitoring of resale price by Intel at a macro level cannot be termed as resale price maintenance in terms of section 3(4)(e) of the Act and cannot by itself be said to be anti-competitive. No evidence was found by the Director General of Investigation (DG) to suggest that the aforesaid act of Intel would in any manner create barriers to new entrants in the market, drive existing competitors out of the market, or foreclose competition.

In Ghanshyam Dass Vij v. Bajaj Corp. Ltd. and Ors., 2 the DG found Bajaj to have indulged in RPM by prescribing rates at which its FMCG products (particularly hair oil) were to be re-sold by the dealers to the retailers including the imposition of vertical restrictions on the dealers along with its decision to terminate the dealership of the Informant. The CCI however, disagreed with the findings of the DG noting that the DG only looked into sales, distribution model and had completely missed conducting a study of other players in the FMCG sector and failed to note that there was no dearth of products of other equally placed and even better brands in the market. The CCI opined that though Bajaj had imposed vertical restraints upon its distributors, the effect on the market had not been shown to have caused Appreciable Adverse Effect on Competition (AAEC), the standard against which RPM has to be measured under Indian law.

For the first time, in Re: M/s Fx Enterprise Solutions India Pvt. Ltd v. M/s Hyundai Motor India Limited,3 the CCI held that the restriction imposed by a company (Hyundai) on the maximum permissible discount that may be given by a dealer to the end-consumer, amounts to an act of RPM, that violated the Act. The CCI found that Hyundai monitored the maximum permissible discount levels through a 'Discount Control Mechanism' which was implemented in the following manner:

  • Hyundai mandated the dealers to adhere to the maximum permissible discount by not authorizing them to give discounts above the recommended range.
  • Hyundai admitted to appointing 'mystery shopping agencies' to collect data with respect to the levels of discount offered by its various different dealers all over NCR.
  • Though Hyundai contended that their discount schemes were recommendatory in nature and that the distributors/ dealers were not mandated to follow the scheme, there was enough evidence to show that a penalty punishment mechanism had been put in place by Hyundai for any non-compliance by the dealers with the discount scheme.

As a result, a penalty of INR 87 crores was imposed. Currently, on an appeal filed by Hyundai, the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) vide its order dated 18 July 20174 has stayed the fine and recorded that the CCI, by denying Hyundai an opportunity to respond when it changed the definition of the relevant market had violated Hyundai's right to fair hearing and in turn failed to adhere with the principles of 'natural justice'.

CCI's Approach to RPM

The consistent approach of the CCI in all these decisions has been to look into the effect of the RPM on the market rather than adopting a per se approach to fixing resale prices. In Bajaj, the CCI considered the market structure of FMCG products, and in particular, the hair oil segment in India, and opined that it was dynamic, wide, and that consumers had various options to choose from. Bajaj did not hold the position of strength in this sector as other larger players were also present in the market. Any RPM arrangements were therefore not likely to affect the inter-brand competition. No penalty was thus imposed by the CCI as it failed to establish AAEC based on the factors enumerated under Section 19(3) of the Act.

However, in Hyundai, it found that the car manufacturer was a significant player in the market, and by determining the level of discount for each model and variant of its passenger cars, it was able to reduce intra-brand competition. There was also enough evidence before the CCI to show that the conduct of Hyundai resulted in AAEC, and the consumers were made to pay higher prices as a result.

Currently, a matter relating to RPM in the online space is pending investigation. In M/s Jasper Infotech Private Limited v. Ms. Kaff Applicances (India) Pvt. Ltd.5, the CCI prima facie held that "the Opposite Party was having an arrangement/agreement with its authorized dealers under which the dealers were given the 'Market Operating Price (MOP) price list' for its product. Such an agreement hinders the ability of dealers/distributors to compete on the price of the product. The Commission feels that such prescription of MOP by the Opposite Party to its dealers and insistence to follow MOP pricing regime prima facie seems to be in contravention of section 3(4)(e) read with section 3(1) of the Act."

RPM in other jurisdictions

In the United States, Section 16 of the Sherman Act makes it per se illegal for a manufacturer and its distributor to agree on the minimum price that the distributor can charge for the manufacturer's goods.

A landmark decision of the U.S. Supreme Court discussed the concept of RPM in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc..7 Leegin had decided to refuse sale to retailers if they intended to discount its products below their recommended retail price. Five years after this policy was introduced, Leegin discovered that Kay's Kloset was violating the policy by marking down the Leegin products by 20%. When Kay's refused to comply with Leegin's policy, Leegin cut them off. PSKS, the parent company of Kay's, sued charging that Leegin had violated antitrust laws when it entered into agreements with retailers to charge only those prices fixed by Leegin. The District Court excluded expert testimony about Leegin's pricing policy's pro-competitive effects on the ground that Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co8., makes it per se  illegal under Section 1 of the Sherman Act for a manufacturer and its distributor to agree on the minimum price the distributor can charge for the manufacturer's goods. This scenario changed when the U.S Supreme Court overruled Dr. Miles by holding in Leegin that a better legal analysis would be the "rule of reason," under which price minimums would be held illegal only in cases where they could be shown to be anticompetitive. RPM was no longer to be considered a per se violation and was subjected to the 'rule of reason' approach – similar to the approach followed by the CCI.

In contrast, the European Commission (EC) has defined RPM as "agreements or concerted practices having as their direct or indirect object the establishment of a fixed or minimum resale price or a fixed or minimum price level to be observed by the buyer."9 Under the Commission's Guidelines on Vertical Restraints, though it is theoretically possible to claim that an agreement containing RPM does not fall within the prohibition of Article 101(1) Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), if it produces efficiencies pursuant to Article 101(3) TFEU, in practice, the EU competition authorities still presume RPM to fall within the scope of Article 101(1) TFEU.

Most major EU countries such as Germany and France treat RPM as a per-se violation. In the United Kingdom, as well, there is a relatively strict prohibition on minimum RPM arrangements. Very recently, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) fined a bathroom supplier £826,00010 for restricting the prices at which online retailers could resell its bathroom products. The supplier, Ultra Finishing Limited (Ultra), supplied its bathroom products to various online retailers for resale. Ultra had issued the retailers with 'recommended retail prices' for these products, but these were not genuine recommendations. Rather, retailers were threatened with sanctions (including loss of supply) if they did not price at or above the 'recommended' price.  These penalties included charging the non-conforming retailers higher prices for future products supplies, withdrawing their rights to use Ultra's brand images online or, in some cases, ceasing supply altogether. It was argued by Ultra that it had introduced the 'recommended' pricing guidelines in an attempt to protect its brand. The CMA held that the practice undertaken by Ultra finishing limited constituted RPM in the sense that it limited the retailers' ability to offer lower prices than the 'recommended' retail prices to potential customers.


In its first substantive decision on RPM, the CCI has opined that any agreement that has a direct or indirect object of establishing a fixed or minimum resale price level, may impede competition, provided that it has an AAEC on the market. RPM, through the Hyundai Case has been broadened to include any conduct that fixes the distribution margin, fixes the maximum level of discount, grants rebates, shares the promotional costs conditional to the adherence to a given price level, links resale price to resale prices of competitors, or uses threats, intimidation, warnings, penalties, delay or suspension of deliveries as a means of fixing the prices charged by the retailers.

It is yet to be seen what impact this judgment will have. Whether it will actually deter manufacturers from resorting to stringent actions – including termination of dealerships, etc, whenever there is a non-compliance of the prescribed/ recommended discount by their dealers, or not, is something that only time will tell.

­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­­ ­­­Footnotes

1 CCI order dated 16.01.2014 in Case No. 48 of 2014.

2  CCI order dated 12.10.2015 in Case No. 68 of 2013.

3 CCI order dated 14.6.2017in Case No. 36 of 2014.

4 Competition Appeal (AT) No. 06 of  2017

5 CCI order dated 29.12.2014 in Case No. 61 of 2014.

6 Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal.

7 127 S. Ct. 2705 (2007).

8 220 U.S. 373 (1911).

9 Commission notice - Guidelines on Vertical Restraints, Official Journal C 130, 19.05.2010.

10 Case CE/9857-14:

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
Mondaq on Twitter
Mondaq Free Registration
Gain access to Mondaq global archive of over 375,000 articles covering 200 countries with a personalised News Alert and automatic login on this device.
Mondaq News Alert (some suggested topics and region)
Select Topics
Registration (please scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of

To Use you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.


The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.


Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions