Miss Lucy
← All judgments

JSW Energy Limited, Mumbai, Maharashtra — Combination C-2016/05/399

Competition Commission Of India1 July 2016

Ratio decidendi

The rule this decision rests on

Where a notified combination involves a horizontal overlap but the combined market shares of the acquirer and the target, measured by installed capacity and by electricity generation, are insignificant, and numerous other competitors operate in the market, the combination is not likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on competition under the factors in Section 20(4), and it may be approved under Section 31(1). Where the acquirer's market shares in both upstream and downstream markets are insignificant, it is unlikely to have the ability to foreclose those markets, so no appreciable adverse effect arises from vertical foreclosure. An approval granted on the basis of the acquirer's information stands revoked if that information is found to be incorrect at any time.

Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.

Judgment

As delivered

COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIAFair CompetitionFor Greater Good01.07.2016

Notice under Section 6 (2) of the Competition Act, 2002 given by JSW Energy Limited

CORAM: Mr. Sudhir Mital Member

Mr. U.C. Nahta Member

Mr. M.S. Sahoo Member

Mr. G. P. Mittal Member

Legal representative: Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas

Order under Section 31(1) of the Competition Act, 2002

1. On 13.05.2016, the Competition Commission of India (“Commission”) received a notice under sub-section (2) of Section 6 of the Competition Act, 2002 (“Act”) filed by JSW Energy Limited (“JSWEL” or “Acquirer”). The notice has been filed pursuant to execution of a Securities Purchase Agreement (“SPA”) on 03.05.2016 between JSWEL, Jindal Power Limited “(JPL”), Everbest Steel and Mining Holdings Limited (“SPV”) and Jindal Steel and Power Limited (“JSPL).

2. The proposed combination relates to (a) transfer of a 1000 MW operational coal fired thermal power plant at Tamnar, Chhattisgarh (“Target Asset”), currently owned by JPL, to SPV on a going concern basis pursuant to a scheme of arrangement amongst JPL, JSPL and the SPV; and (b) subsequent acquisition of 100 per cent stake in the SPV by JSWEL.

3. The proposed combination falls under Section 5(a) of the Act.

(Combination Registration No. C-2016/05/399) Fair Competition For Greater Good

4. JSWEL, a listed public limited company, was incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956. It is stated to be inter alia engaged in the business of power generation, power trading & power transmission, mining and equipment manufacturing.

5. JSPL is a listed public limited company and is stated to be the flagship company of the JSPL Group. The JSPL Group is engaged in steel, power, mining and infrastructure sectors. JPL is an unlisted public limited company in which JSPL holds 96.42 per cent of the equity stake. JPL is engaged in power generation in India. Further, SPV is an unlisted public company and was incorporated in January, 2013. At present, 99 per cent of the shareholding of SPV is held by JSPL and the remaining 1 per cent held by others. It is stated that the SPV currently does not have any business operations.

6. It is observed that there is horizontal overlap between the Acquirer and JPL (through Target Asset) as they are both engaged in generation of power in India. However, the combined market share of the Acquirer and the Target Asset, both in terms of installed capacity and electricity generation is insignificant to raise any competition concern. Further, the Commission observes that there are many players engaged in the power generation business in India that include public sector undertakings like National Thermal Power Corporation Ltd., Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Ltd., along with various private players such as Adani Power Limited and Tata Power Limited.

7. It is also noted that the Acquirer is also engaged in the downstream markets of power transmission and power trading. However, its market share in both these downstream markets as well as upstream market is insignificant and therefore, it is unlikely that the Acquirer would have the ability to foreclose either markets.

8. Considering the facts on record, the details provided in the notice given under sub-section (2) of section 6 of the Act and assessment of the proposed combination on the basis of factors stated in sub-section (4) of section 20 of the Act, the Commission is of the opinion that the proposed combination is not likely to have an appreciable adverse effect on competition in India and therefore, the Commission hereby approves the same under sub-section (1) of section 31 of the Act.

(Combination Registration No. C-2016/05/399) Fair Competition For Greater Good

9. This order shall stand revoked if, at any time, the information provided by the Acquirer is found to be incorrect.

10. The information provided by the Acquirer is confidential at this stage subject to the provisions of Section 57 of the Act.

11. The Secretary is directed to communicate to the Acquirer accordingly.

This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.

Research this judgment with Miss Lucy

Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.

Try Miss Lucy free