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
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI's free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.