NEW DELHI: A division bench of the Delhi High Court on Tuesday dismissed UltraTech Cement‘s appeal seeking to restrain the Builders Association of India (BAI) from being made a party before the antitrust regulator in a case related to cartelisation and price manipulation by grey cement manufacturers.
While upholding its single judge’s order directing impleadment of the BAI before the Competition Commission of India in the case, a division bench of Chief Justice Devendra Kumar Upadhyaya and Justice Tejas Karia said the impleadment does not amount to determination of any right either of UltraTech or that of the BAI. Such impleadment is only to aid the Commission to arrive at a correct conclusion in the allegation regarding anti-competitive practices.
The court said the proceedings drawn by the CCI on receipt of complaints or otherwise are, primarily, to achieve the public interest and, therefore, if in a given case certain investigation/inquiry is conducted by the Commission against certain entities in respect of allegations of their indulgence in anti-competition practices, any party or person or entity or an enterprise having sufficient interest in the matter can be impleaded in the proceedings of the Commission, which, in our opinion, will be only to farther the public interest.
“Such impleadment would be in aid of the Commission to arrive at a correct and just conclusion of the proceedings drawn by its…,” the judgment stated.
UltraTech had argued that BAI is a hostile body, and by its impleadment it will be made privy to confidential and non-confidential materials in the proceedings before the Commission and, therefore, opportunity ought to have been given to it before impleading the association as a party in the case.
In 2019, the competition regulator had received letters and emails from various market participants, including customer trade associations and dealers, alleging that the conduct of grey cement manufacturers had adverse competitive effects within the country. Even BAI had alleged that cartelisation by grey cement manufacturers was resulting in an abnormal increase in prices of the commodity.
Thereafter, the CCI had passed a suo motu order directing its director general to initiate an investigation into the allegations. In 2023, the Commission impleaded BAI as a party in the case, holding that the association had a substantial interest in the outcome of the proceedings and, therefore, it was necessary to allow it to present its opinion in the matter for a meaningful inquiry. The CCI had also permitted the BAI to inspect the non-confidential records and to file its opinion on the investigation report.
Challenging the antitrust watchdog’s order, UltraTech Cement had moved the single judge on the grounds that the CCI had passed an ex-parte order that made the builders’ body a party in the case without granting it a hearing.
