India: Competition News Bulletin – October 2018

Last Updated: 15 October 2018
Article by Vaish Associates Advocates



Competition Commission of India (CCI) imposes penalty on Geep Industries for being a member of bilateral "ancillary" cartel

By way of order dated August 30, 2018, the CCI imposed a penalty of INR 9,64 06,682 (Nine crores sixty-four lakh six thousand six hundred and eight two) on Geep Industries (India) Private limited ('Geep') for being in a bilateral ancillary cartel with Panasonic (India). Panasonic was a member of a larger primary cartel.

The investigation by the CCI was initiated on the basis of a lesser penalty application ('Leniency Application') filed by Panasonic Corporation, Japan on behalf of itself, Panasonic Energy India Co. Limited, and their respective directors, officers and employees on September 7, 2016. The Leniency Application filed by Panasonic disclosed the existence of a "bilateral ancillary cartel" between Panasonic (India) and Geep industries in the institutional sales of dry cell batteries.

It was further disclosed by the Leniency Application that Panasonic (India) had a primary cartel with Everyday Industries India (Everyday) and Indo National Limited (Nippo), where they coordinated the market prices of zinc-carbon dry-cell batteries. Utilizing its fore knowledge about the timing of price increase, Panasonic used to negotiate and increase the basic price of the batteries being sold by it to Geep. It was further disclosed in the Leniency Application that Panasonic and Geep used to agree on the market price of the batteries being sold by them in order to maintain price parity. Such price parity was in consonance with the prices determined by the Primary cartel, which comprised of Panasonic, Eveready and Nippo.

It was noted by the CCI that initially, the supply of batteries by Panasonic to Geep was on a quotation basis based on the required quantities. Subsequently, however, a Product Supply Agreement was executed between Panasonic and Geep, which obliged Geep to maintain the market prices proposed by Panasonic. As regards the defense taken by Panasonic that the particular clause which obliged Geep to not act in detriment to Panasonic's interest was merely to ensure discipline in trade. The CCI however rejected the defence, holding that the "the Product Supply Agreement was an agreement in normal commercial trade on 'principal-to-principal' basis between two independent parties, who are otherwise competitors. As such, it was held that the agreement impeded competition and cannot be justified.

It was further observed that when two independent competitors agree to protect each other's interest in the market, by no stretch of imagination can such agreement be considered pro-competitive. It was held that the very objective of the clause is to restrict or even eliminate fair competition in the market, and, therefore, no justifications offered are acceptable.

The penalty on Geep was calculated at the rate of 4% of its turnover from FY 2010-11 to 2016-17. However, Panasonic Energy India Co. Limited was granted a 100% reduction in the penalty amount since its representatives had provided genuine, full, continuous and expeditious cooperation during the entire course of investigation which not only enabled the CCI to order investigation but also helped in establishing a contravention of Section 3 of the Competition Act, 2002 ('Act').

The CCI also imposed penalty under Section 48 of the Act on Geep officials, Mr. Pushpa M (In-charge of accounts and finance), Mr. Joeb Thanawala (exchanged emails containing sensitive information), and Mr. Jainuddin Thanawala (Director).

(Source: CCI decision dated August 30, 2018; for full text see CCI website)

VA Comment: This case shows hardening of stance on cartels in India because, this is the first case in which a party which was not a member of the original/Primary cartel was held liable on the ground that it is in a "Bilateral ancillary cartel" with one of the members of the Primary cartel.

CCI imposes penalty on Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) and its office bearers for limiting production and supply of dubbed movies within Karnataka

By way of an order dated August 30, 2018, the CCI imposed a penalty of INR. 9,72 ,943/- (Nine lakh seventy-two thousand nine hundred and forty-three) on KFFC for limiting production and supply in the market for dubbed movies within Karnataka.

The CCI began investigation into the present case based on an information that KFCC is hindering the release of the Tamil movie originally titled as "Yennai Arindhal" (now titled "Satyadev IPS")in Karnataka.

While finding a contravention of the provisions of the Act, the CCI relied on the video recording of a press meet available on YouTube which was attended by all the opposite parties. The video clip clearly evidenced a meeting of minds to prevent the release of the dubbed movie.

In addition to the Press Meet specifically targeting the release of dubbed films in the State of Karnataka, Jaggesh, a renowned Kannada film star and politician also took to twitter and issued multiple tweets, whereby he tried to charge the emotions of Kannada speaking people and instigated them to agitate against the dubbed cinema by specifically calling for protests at theatres where "Sathyadev IPS" belonging to Informant was scheduled to be screened.

The office bearers of the association, Mr. N.M Suresh (Honorary Secretary of KFFC) and Mr. H. Shivram (Honorary Secretary of Kannada Okkuta) were also found to be individually liable by the CCI.

As regards the role played by Jaggesh, the CCI noted that he was able to mobilise the masses emotionally to counter the release of dubbed content in general and the Informant's film in particular. It was further noted that the tenor of his tweets coupled with his stardom, was instrumental in mobilizing the sentiments of the masses against dubbed movies.

(Source: CCI decision dated August 30, 2018; for full text see CCI website)

VA Comments: This is a case of repeated violation by KFCC i.e. blatantly restricting the exhibition of dubbed movies in the State of Karnataka on grounds of protecting "cultural identity", which the Commission found to have a shade of recidivism.

CCI imposes penalty on Sugar mill manufacturers and Trade Associations (ISMA and EMAI) for collusive bidding in Government tender under the Ethanol Blending Programme.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI/Commission) vide order dated September 18, 2018 has imposed heavy monetary penalties at 7% of their average relevant turnover on sugar mills in Uttar Pradesh (UP), Gujarat and Andhra Pradesh (AP) and at 10% of the average receipts of the last three years on their trade associations (Indian Sugar Mills Association (ISMA) and Ethanol Manufactures Association of India (EMAI) for indulging in cartelization in supply of ethanol in response to a joint tender issued by three Oil Marketing Companies (OMCs) i.e. IOCL, HPCL & BPCL for procurement of ethanol for the ambitious Ethanol Blending Programme (EBP) of the Government of India , Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (Mo PNG) for contravention of Section- 3(1) read with Section 3 (3) of the Act. A brief background of the case is as under.

The Indian Government introduced an ambitious Ethanol Blended Program (EBP), primarily to reduce its heavy crude oil import bill and keeping in mind the beneficial effects it would have for the agriculture sector and country's environmental footprint. Ethanol is produced in India from sugar molasses. From molasses, Rectified Spirit (RS) is produced having a strength of 95%. RS is then further distilled to produce ethanol having strength of 99.80% alcohol which can be blended with petrol.

In the year 2010-11 and 2011-12, OMCs floated tenders on 'Expression of Interest' (EOI) basis for supply of ethanol. The Cabinet Committee on Economic Affairs (CCEA) used to determine the base price for procurement of ethanol i.e. Rs. 27 per litre as an ad hoc interim price. Meanwhile a Committee headed by Sh. Soumitra Chowdhary was formed to examine the various issues pertaining to the pricing of ethanol for EBP Program. The said Committee, considering the pale response from the sugar mills for supply of ethanol against the fixed base price determined by CCEA at the rate of Rs. 27/- per litre recommended to introduce competitive bidding in the procurement to attract the sugar mills to supply ethanol on market driven prices. CCEA considered the Committee's report and issued a Press Release on 22.11.2012 which mentioned inter alia that "the procurement price of ethanol will be decided henceforth between OMCs and suppliers of ethanol ". Accordingly, the first joint tender for procurement of ethanol on competitive market prices was issued by Oil Marketing companies (OMCs), through BPCL, the coordinated Agency nominated for the purpose, on 02 January 2013. The tender process required quotations of basic price of ethanol and Net Delivered Cost (NDC).

The two main issues before the CCI were-

Firstly, whether the joint tenders floated by the OMCs violate Section 3(1) and Section 3(3) of the Act as being an anti-competitive agreement?

Secondly, whether the tender floated by the OMCs rigged by sugar mills and trade associations?

As regards the first issue, the CCI observed that there existed a limited availability of ethanol and in such a situation, if separate tenders would have been issued, the OMC which issued the first tender would have probably procured all or most of the quantity and thereby limiting procurement by the other OEMs. Moreover, since the terms of the tenders were same for all the OMCs, floating a joint tender is the most efficient option (Cost effectiveness, availability of equitable blending ethanol, non-exclusion of any OMC). Therefore, it was concluded that the joint tender did not violate the provisions of the Act.

With respect to the second issue, the CCI found that the bidders located in depots of Uttar Pradesh, Gujarat, Andhra Pradesh acted in a concerted and collusive manner in submitting their bids as indicated by their trade associations i.e. EMAI and ISMA. The collusive behavior was evident in the fact that the total quantity offered by the bidders matched the total required quantity and the absence of any plausible explanations by the bidders as to such happening. In addition to mere price parallelism, the CCI also took notice of the exact matching of freight charges by the bidders despite substantial variance in distance between the distilleries of the bidders and the depots for which they participated in the bidding process. However, for Maharashtra, the CCI noted that the bids for NDCs were not similar and bids for basic price matched only for a few bidders and hence there was no collusive bidding.

On the basis of its findings, the CCI imposed a penalty of 7% of the average relevant turnover of the preceding three financial years arising out of the sale of ethanol on the sugar mills. Further, the CCI imposed a penalty of 10% of the average receipts of preceding three financial years on the trade associations (EMAI and ISMA).

(Source: CCI decisions dated September 18, 2018; for full text see CCI website)

VA Comment: This case amply demonstrates the hardening of stance of the CCI in punishing any apparent coordination between competitors, mainly on legal grounds and ignoring the market realties. The case also illustrates how the trade associations facilitate coordination between competitors.

The ambitious EBP of the Government of India was a nonstarter from the beginning due to the non-remunerative price for the procurement of ethanol fixed by the CCEA i.e. at Rs. 27 per litre whereas the sugar mills / ethanol manufacturers were able to sell the same to other private buyers i.e. distilleries and pharma companies at much higher rates. The informations filed were clearly motivated with vested interest of the distilleries which were themselves procuring ethanol at higher rates from the same sugar mills in UP, for instance, which was mentioned to the CCI during the initial hearings. Thus, the basic price of Rs.35 to Rs. 36 per litre quoted by the sugar mills in UP apparently reflected the competitive market price, which fact was ignored by the CCI. The concept of demand-supply gap plays a major role in market-driven pricing mechanism which seems to have been ignored. The fact that the price of a product is determined based on the demand available of a product in the market cannot be ignored. It is disappointing to observe that the Commission has failed to appreciate the economics factors which has led the sugar mills to quote higher price.

Secondly, it is also surprising how the sugar mills in Maharashtra, which, in furtherance to the diktat given by the President of EMAI had all quoted basic price above Rs. 40/- per litre have been exonerated even when the EMAI itself was penalized.

Finally, it is necessary to question whether the sugar mills were really operating in a cartel, because nearly every OP made party to the instant case made a submission that the price quoted was realized on the basis of demand available in the market.

To read this Bulletin in full, please click here.

© 2018, Vaish Associates Advocates,
All rights reserved
Advocates, 1st & 11th Floors, Mohan Dev Building 13, Tolstoy Marg New Delhi-110001 (India).

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist professional advice should be sought about your specific circumstances. The views expressed in this article are solely of the authors of this article.

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.

Vaish Associates Advocates
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 Sign Up
Gain free access to lawyers expertise from more than 250 countries.
Email Address
Company Name
Confirm Password
Mondaq Newsalert
Select Topics
Select Regions
Registration (you must 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