The Match Group, Inc. Vs. Apple Inc. & other.
- Citation28/2022
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an information under Section 19(1)(a) concerns substantially the same subject matter as allegations already under investigation by the Director General in another case, the Commission may, under the proviso to Section 26(1), tag the information with that pending case. No separate investigation is then required, and the information abides by the Commission's decision in the lead cases. Clubbing under the proviso to Section 26(1) does not alter the scope of the investigation already directed in the lead cases.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
ORDER 1. The present Information has been filed by the Informant, under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘Act’) against the Opposite Parties alleging contravention of the provisions of Section 3(4) as well as Section 4 of the Act.
2. The Commission considered the Information in its ordinary meeting held today and noted that the subject matter of the allegations made in the instant Information is substantially the same, which is currently under examination before the Director General (‘DG’) in the ongoing investigation in Case No. 24 of 2021, which was referred to the Director General (DG) for investigation vide order dated 31.12.2021 passed under Section 26(1) of the Act with directions to submit the investigation report. Subsequently, in terms of proviso to Section 26(1) of the Act, the Commission vide its order dated 02.05.2022, clubbed another case i.e. Case No. 15 of 2022 with Case No. 24 of 2021 and the DG was directed to submit a consolidated investigation report in the matter.
3. In this backdrop, having considered the instant Information and noting the similarities in the subject matter of the allegations made therein with those under examination before the Director General (‘DG’) as mentioned supra, the Commission, in terms of proviso to Section 26(1) of the Act, decided to tag the present matter with Case Nos. 24 of 2021 and 15 of 2022. No separate investigation is required to be undertaken in Case No. 28 of 2022 the instant case and the same shall abide by the decision of the Commission in Case Nos. 24 of 2021 and 15 of 2022. It is clarified that the scope of the investigation directed vide order dated 31.12.2021 and the clubbing order dated 02.05.2022, remains unaltered by virtue of the clubbing of the present matter with Case Nos. 24 of 2021 and 15 of 2022.
4. The Secretary is directed to send a copy of this order along with the Information to the Office of the DG and the counsel of the Informant, for information.
Sd/- Sd/- (Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi) (Sangeeta Verma) Member Member Sd/- (Ashok Kumar Gupta) Chairperson
Case No. 28 of 2022
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