COMPAT upholds CCI order dismissing abuse of dominance allegation against Vodafone |

COMPAT by its order dated August 16, 2016 has upheld order of CCI whereby it declined to order an investigation into the allegations of abuse of dominance by Vodafone India for levying exorbitant charges for international roaming plan. The information was filed in CCI by Mr. Vishwambhar Marutirao Doiphode alleging that Vodafone India was in a dominant position vis-à-vis the consumer and by taking advantage of that position, it has levied exorbitant charges @ Rs.564/- per MB as against Rs.30/- per MB payable for international roaming plan. The appellant further averred that in India the data usage charges are 0.04 per 10 KB, which comes to approximately Rs.4/- per MB, but Respondent had charged Rs.564/- per MB and, thereby, acted in contravention of Section 4(2)(a)(i), 4(2)(c) and 4(2)(e) of the Act.

The CCI held that no prima-facie case was made out for directing an investigation into the allegation of abuse of dominant position by Respondent as besides Respondent, Airtel, Idea Reliance, Tata, Aircel and MTNL were providing wireless telecommunication services and offering international mobile data services too. Also, the Informant had not provided any statistics to show that Respondent had the largest share in the relevant market and held that in the absence of such material, Respondent cannot be said to be in a dominant position in the relevant market.

The COMPAT dismissing the appeal, held that the Commission did not commit any error by declining to order investigation into the allegation of abuse of dominant position levelled by the appellant because he did not produce any evidence to prima facie show that market share of Respondent is largest among the telecom service providers in the relevant market. In the absence of an affirmative finding that Respondent was in a dominant position in the relevant market, there was no warrant for ordering an investigation into the allegation of abuse of dominant position by the said respondent and the Commission rightly declined to entertain the prayer made in the information.(Source: Order dated August 16, 2016. For full text see COMPAT website-www.compat.nic.in)

Suggested Reading:

(i) CCI to investigate Mahyco Monsanto for abuse of dominance

(ii) CCI initiates investigation against Athletic Federation of India

(iii) CCI Order refusing interim relief against OLA Cabs in an ongoing investigation upheld by COMPAT

(iv) COMPAT upholds CCI order dismissing abuse of dominance allegation against Delhi International Airport Limited (DIAL)

About the author

M M SHARMA

 Comdt. (Retd.) M. M. Sharma heads the Competition Law & Policy team in VA since 2009 and has over 30 years’ experience as an Advocate of Delhi High Court and holds a Post Graduate Diploma in Economics of Competition Law from Kings College, London. He has worked in the Competition Commission of India (CCI) as Additional Registrar during 2006-2008 and was responsible for drafting the Implementing Regulations under the Competition Act, 2002. He has experience of working as Head-Legal /In-house Counsel for a large Corporate Group in the Steel and Power sector before joining VA in 2009. He has represented clients as an independent arguing Counsel in landmark cases decided by CCI, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) , High Courts and the Supreme Court. As a prolific writer, he contributes articles and is regularly quoted on competition issues in National Newspapers and interviewed by TV Channels. He also teaches as a visiting faculty in various Universities and Institutions and is widely regarded as a subject expert in various Committees of Apex Business Chambers, such as FICCI, CII, ASSOCHAM and PHD CCI.  Mr. Sharma has been mentioned as a “Notable Practitioner” in the “Competition/Antitrust” category of Chambers & Partners (Asia Pacific) Ranking of Leading Lawyers for Business in India for the year 2012 and 2013. VA’s competition law and policy team has also been awarded the Law Firm of the Year Award for “Competition/Antitrust Law” for 2013 by the Indian Business Law Journal. Included as a ‘Recognised Practitioner’ in Individual Lawyers’ranking by Chamber’s Asia Pacific Guide 2020 for Antitrust/Competition Law.