• Sin categoría

Monopoly Policy Restrictive Agreements

Gautam Chikermane is Vice-President of the ORF. His field of research is international and Indian economic policy. The power of the central government to require the Commission to submit a report. 61. The power of the central government to compel the Commission to submit a report. The central government may at any time ask the Commission to report on the general impact of these business practices on the public interest, which, in the view of this government, are either monopolistic practices or 2 [restrictive or unfair business practices] or a concentration of economic power to the common detriment or contribute to them. In April 1964, the Indian government appointed the Commission of Inquiry on Monopolies chaired by Supreme Court Justice K.C Das Gupta to examine the extent and effects of the concentration of economic power in the hands of the private sector and the prevalence of monopolistic and restrictive business practices in other sectors of economic activity other than agriculture. [3] Allegations in the application filed in item 1, an order ordering the business owner or any other person to pay the plaintiff the amount he considers achievable by the business or its owner or, if applicable, by the other person in compensation for the loss or injury suffered by the plaintiff as a result of a monopoly or restriction , or unfair business practices by that company or any other person. Under Section 46 of the Competition Act, there is no infringement per se where the supply of goods or services of any kind on the market is delivered or acquired by a monopoly position.

It is the abuse of the monopolistic situation that constitutes a violation of the law. The Competition Commission can intervene when it is an instrument for implementing and implementing competition policy, preventing and sanctioning anti-competitive business practices of companies and unnecessary government intervention in the market. Competition law applies to both written agreements and written agreements, agreements between companies and individuals. It is surprising that a five-decade-old subject – the concentration of economic power, the dominance of the hands of the few and the resulting inequalities – is still alive today, not only in India, but around the world. According to P.C Mahalanobis` report in February 1964, the government appointed Judge K.C three months later. The Gupta to chair the commission of inquiry on monopolies. In its report of 28 October 1965, the Commission highlighted the subject: [2] «Concentration of economic power is the central problem; Monopolistic and anti-competitive behaviours can be considered «functions» of such concentration. The Commission took the best industrialists of the day with confidence.

This included the chairman of the Tata Group, J.R.D. Tata, who stated that if these orders were not imposed by law, the permanent body would be filed for purely political reasons or without reason. [3] In other words, he insisted on the rule of law over good intentions. A «bill» accompanied the recommendations – a practice that has since been revived and only revived in 2013 by the Financial Sector Legislative Reform Commission, which, in addition to the recommendations [4], drafted the Indian Financial Code [5] – on the basis of which the Commission on Monopolies and Competition Practices was created. That is why, on 18 December 1969, Parliament passed the Restrictive Monopolies and Trade Practices Act [6] with five objectives: to prevent the concentration of economic power at the common end, to control monopolies, to prohibit monopoly practices, to prohibit restrictive trade practices of competition and to prohibit unfair business practices.