Competition Monthly - January 2026

CCI DIRECTS MAHARASHTRA WINE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION, PUNE DISTRICT WINE MERCHANTS ASSOCIATION AND ASSOCIATION OF PROGRESSIVE LIQUOR VENDORS TO CEASE ANTI-COMPETITIVE PRACTICES

The Competition Commission of India (CCI), by its order dated 11 December 2025, directed three liquor trade associations in Maharashtra to cease and desist from engaging in anti-competitive practices in contravention of the Competition Act, 2002 (Act).

The informant alleged that the Maharashtra Wine Merchants Association (OP-1), the Pune District Wine Merchants Association (OP-2), and the Association of Progressive Liquor Vendors (OP-3) collectively imposed restrictive commercial terms on manufacturers, distributors, and sellers of alcoholic beverages, including stipulating retail margins, pricing terms, transportation charges, cash discounts, credit periods, mandatory launch fees and donations. It was also alleged that the associations required manufacturers to obtain no-objection certificates (NOCs) before launching new products, thereby restricting independent commercial determinations and competition in the market.

After reviewing the evidence, including circulars, emails and other communications issued by the associations, the CCI found that the practices amounted to price-fixing and market control in violation of Sections 3(3)(a) and 3(3)(b), read with Section 3(1) of the Act. The CCI observed that these actions undermined free market competition and influenced commercial terms that ought to be independently determined by each enterprise, including pricing and margins.

Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) under the TRAI Act, 1997 and the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulations, 2017. Relying heavily on the Hon'ble Supreme Court's decision in CCI v. Bharti Airtel Ltd., Jiostar argued that the CCI could not assume jurisdiction unless TRAI had first examined and determined the alleged regulatory violations.

Rejecting these submissions, the Division Bench held that the Act and the TRAI Act are distinct special statutes operating in their respective spheres. The Court clarified that while TRAI functions as a sectoral regulator, the CCI is a market regulator tasked with addressing anti-competitive conduct. The mere existence of a sectoral regulatory framework does not oust the CCI's jurisdiction to inquire into allegations of abuse of dominance or anti-competitive practices. The Court further held that the Bharti Airtel judgment was fact-specific and could not be read as laying down a blanket rule requiring prior adjudication by a sectoral regulator in every case.

The Court also reiterated that an order passed under Section 26(1) of the Act is administrative in nature, involves no determination on merits, and does not entail civil consequences. Consequently, judicial interference at the investigation stage was held to be premature. The Court noted that Jiostar would remain free to raise jurisdictional and substantive objections before the CCI during the course of investigation and subsequent proceedings.

Accordingly, the Division Bench dismissed the appeal, affirmed the validity of the CCI's investigation order, and allowed the competition law proceedings to continue in accordance with law.

uprights, and backpacks markets are in the ranges of [5–10]%, [10–15]%, [25–30]%, and [0–5]% respectively, while the market share of the Acquirers' affiliates across these markets remains [0–5]%. The CCI further observed that the luggage and handbags markets are competitive, with the presence of several established players such as Safari, Samsonite, and Wildcraft. In light of the miniscule incremental market share attributable to the Acquirers and the competitive market structure, the CCI concluded that the proposed combination was not likely to raise competition concerns.

With regard to vertical linkages, the CCI identified a potential vertical linkage between the Target in the upstream market for manufacture and sale of handbags and an affiliate of the Acquirers in the downstream market for sale of handbags. The CCI observed that the handbags market is competitive and the downstream distribution segment is fragmented, and therefore concluded that the Parties would have neither the ability nor the incentive to cause any input or customer foreclosure.

Accordingly, the CCI concluded that the combination was not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition and approved it.

CCI APPROVES ALLISON TRANSMISSION'S ACQUISITION OF DANA'S OFF-HIGHWAY BUSINESS

The CCI, by its order, approved the proposed acquisition of the off-highway business of Dana Incorporated (Dana OH/Target) by Allison Transmission Holdings, Inc. (Acquirer). The transaction relates to the acquisition of Target's offhighway drivetrain, transmissions, and propulsion solutions business. In India, the combination covers Target's three subsidiaries — Graziano Trasmissioni India OHV transmissions and the downstream market for manufacture and supply of OHV transmissions in India.

The CCI noted that the combined presence or incremental market share resulting from the proposed combination in both the horizontal overlap and vertical linkage markets is in the range of [0–5]%. The CCI further observed that these markets are In addition to issuing the cease-and-desist directive under Section 27 of the Act, the CCI held the office-bearers of the associations personally liable under Section 48 of the Act for facilitating the anticompetitive practices. However, the CCI refrained from imposing any penalty on the associations/office-bearers as the violative conduct was discontinued and the opposite parties were first-time offenders.

KERALA HIGH COURT – DIVISION BENCH UPHOLDS CCI'S JURISDICTION TO DIRECT INVESTIGATION DESPITE SECTORAL REGULATION

A Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala, by its judgment dated 3 December 2025, dismissed an intra-court appeal filed by Jiostar India Private Limited (formerly Star India Private Limited) (Jiostar) and upheld an order passed by the CCI under Section 26(1) of the Act, directing investigation into allegations of abuse of dominant position.

The dispute arose from information filed in January 2022 by Asianet Digital Network Private Limited (ADNPL), a multi-system operator, alleging that Jiostar had abused its dominant position in the television broadcasting market in Kerala by engaging in discriminatory pricing and granting preferential discounts to a competing distributor. ADNPL alleged that such conduct resulted in denial of market access and violation of Section 4 of the Act. Acting on this information, the CCI formed a prima facie view and directed the Director General to investigate. Jiostar challenged this order before a Single Judge of the Kerala High Court, who dismissed the writ petition, leading to the present appeal.

Before the Division Bench, Jiostar contended that the subject matter squarely fell within the domain of the Telecom.

CCI APPROVES ACQUISITION OF SHAREHOLDING BY MULTIPLES PRIVATE EQUITY FUND IV, MULTIPLES PRIVATE EQUITY GIFT FUND IV, SAMVIBHAG SECURITIES PRIVATE LIMITED, MR. MITHUN PADAM SACHETI AND MR. SIDDHARTHA SACHETI IN V.I.P. INDUSTRIES LIMITED

The CCI, by its order, approved the proposed acquisition of 32% of shareholding in V.I.P. Industries Limited (Target) by Multiples Private Equity Fund IV (MPEF), Multiples Private Equity Gift Fund IV (MPGF), Samvibhag Securities Private Limited, Mr. Mithun Padam Sacheti, and Mr. Siddhartha Sacheti (Acquirers) from certain existing promoters of Target.

The Target is engaged in the manufacture and sale of luggage, handbags, and travel accessories, and operates under brands such as VIP, Skybags, Alfa, Aristocrat, and Caprese, among others.

For the purpose of overlap assessment, the CCI considered the activities of the Acquirers (including their affiliates) and the Target (and its affiliates). The CCI observed that the Parties exhibit horizontal overlaps in the overall luggage segment and in certain narrower segments. Specifically, horizontal overlaps were assessed in the markets for: (i) manufacture and sale of luggage in India; (ii) manufacture and sale of uprights in India; (iii) manufacture and sale of uprights in the organised segment; and (iv) manufacture and sale of backpacks (including duffle bags). While these segments could plausibly be further subsegmented based on form, size, material, design, and pricing, the CCI noted that, given the limited nature and extent of overlaps, it decided to keep the definition of the relevant market open.

The CCI noted that the Target's market shares in the luggage, uprights, organised Private Limited (Graziano India), Dana India Private Limited (Dana India), and Dana India Technical Centre Private Limited (Dana India Technical) — and Acquirer's existing Indian subsidiary Allison Transmission India Private Limited.

The CCI observed that in India, the Acquirer manufactures and distributes gear components and on-highway transmissions and does not supply products such as, axles, wheel and track drives and driveshafts for off highway vehicles (OHVs) (e.g., vehicles used in construction, forestry, mining, agriculture, and other industrial applications). Whereas, in India, the Target is engaged in the manufacture of transmissions, axles, driveshafts, wheel & track drives, components (such as gears, clutches and shafts) and aftermarket parts.

Considering the activities of the Parties in India, the CCI observed that a horizontal overlap exists in the market for manufacture and supply of transmissions for OHVs. The CCI examined the interchangeability between transmissions used in OHVs and those used in on-highway vehicles, and noted that OHV transmissions are not substitutable with on-highway transmissions due to differences in operating conditions. From a supply-side perspective, the development and production of OHV transmissions require distinct technical capabilities, customised engineering, and application-specific testing, which are not readily transferable from on-highway transmission production.

Accordingly, for the purposes of assessment, the CCI considered the presence of the Acquirer group and Dana OH in the market for manufacture and supply of transmissions for OHVs in India. The CCI also examined a vertical linkage between the upstream market for manufacture and supply of components for characterised by the presence of several other significant competitors, and that the transaction would not result in any meaningful change in competitive dynamics.

Accordingly, the CCI concluded that the proposed combination was not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India, and approved it.

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.