The Competition Commission of India was unable to rule that Emaar abused its dominance, despite finding that agreements it entered into with Silapuri Colonizers were anti-competitive. The antitrust watchdog did not find any evidence that supported Emaar had abused its dominance.
The case was brought by Silapuri, who claimed that Emaar used unfair tactics and misrepresentations in the agreements over pricing, location, construction, and design specifications for the Palm Drive real estate project in Gurgaon. Silapuri paid Rs 9 crore for construction, which was delayed.
Full content: The Hindu Business Line
Related content: India’s New Antitrust Regime (Aditya Bhattacharjea, University of Delhi)
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Prime Therapeutics Found in Violation of Antitrust Laws, Arbitrator Rules
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
Honda and Nissan Face Challenges in China Amid Potential Merger
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
Trump Criticizes EU’s Tech Crackdown, Calls It ‘A Form of Taxation’
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
Meta Faces Fresh Allegations of EU Law Breaches in Subscription Service Rollout
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
European Commission Investigates Crypto Rules for Cross-Border Stablecoins
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – International Criminal Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
CPI
The Antitrust Division’s Recent Work to Combat International Cartels
Jan 23, 2025 by
Emma Burnham & Benjamin Christenson
Information Sharing: The New Frontier of U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 23, 2025 by
Brian P. Quinn, Casey Kovarik & Michael Tubach
The Key Role of Guidelines on Exchanges of Information Among Competitors and the Divergent Transatlantic Paths
Jan 23, 2025 by
Rosa Abrantes-Metz & Albert Metz
Leniency, Whistleblowers, and Compliance
Jan 23, 2025 by
Richard Powers, Tara O’Malley & Cory Gordon