The Competition Act, 2002

The Competition Act, 2002 was enacted by the Parliament of India and governs Indian competition law . It replaced the archaic The Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 . Under this legislation, the Competition Commission of India has been established to prevent activities that have an adverse effect on competition in India. [1] [2] This act extends to India except the State of Jammu and Kashmir.

It is a tool to implement and enforce competition policy and to prevent and punish anti-competitive business practices by firms and unnecessary Government interference in the market. Competition laws and regulations, between the enterprises or persons.

The Competition Act, 2002 was amended by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2007 and again by the Competition (Amendment) Act, 2009.

This is an act to establish a commission, protect the interest of consumers and ensure freedom of trade in markets in India.

  • To prohibit the agreements or practices that restrict trading and the competition between two business entities,
  • To the abusive situation of the monopoly market,
  • To provide the opportunity for the entrepreneur for the competition in the market,
  • To have the international support and enforcement network across the world,
  • To prevent from competition and to promote a healthy competition in the market.


The Government of India in April 1964 appointed the Monopolies Inquiry Commission under the Chairmanship of Justice K. C Das Gupta, Judge of the Supreme Court, to inquire into the extent of and concentration of economic power in private hands and prevalence of monopolistic restrictive trade practices in important sectors of economic activity other than agriculture. [3]

To regulate advertising, in 1984, Parliament inserted a chapter on unfair trade practices in the Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. [4]

The Monopoly and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission was constituted in the year 1970. [5]

The Monopolies and the Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 had its genesis in the Directive Principles of State Policy embodied in the Constitution of India. [6] It received the assent of the President of India is 27 December, 1969. [7] The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act Was Intended to curb the rise of concentration of wealth in A Few hands and of monopolistic practices. [8] It was repealed on September 2009. The Act has been succeeded by The Competition Act, 2002. citation needed ]

The Competition Bill, 2001 was introduced in Lok Sabha by Finance Minister Arun Jaitley on August 6, 2001. [9]


  • Acquisition: Acquisition means, directly or indirectly, acquiring or agreeing to acquire shares, voting rights or assets of any enterprise. [10]
  • Cartel: Cartel includes an association of producers, sellers, distributors, traders or service providers who, by agreement among themselves, limited control or attempt to control the production, distribution, or sale of goods. [11]
  • Dominant position: It means a position of strength, enjoyed by an enterprise, in the marketplace that allows it to operate independently of competitive forces. [12]
  • Predatory pricing: Predatory pricing means the sale of goods or services, and the provision of services, with a view to reduce competition or eliminate competitors. [13]
  • Rule of the reasons: It is the analysis of any activity under the challenge on the basis of business justification, competitive intent, impact market, impact on competition and on consumer. It is the logic behind the conclusion for any order. quote needed ]

Salient Features

Anti-Competitive Agreements

Enterprises, persons or associations of companies or persons, Including cartels, `shall not enter into agreements in respect of generation, supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods or provision of services, qui because gold are Likely to issue an ” adverse appreciable impact “on competition in India. Such agreements would be considered as void. Agreements which would be considered to have an appreciable impact

  • Directly or
  • Limit or control production, supply, markets, technical development, investment or supply of services,
  • Share the market or source of production or supply of services by the allocation of the market area,
  • Directly or indirectly result in bid rigging or collusive bidding.

Types of agreement

Competition law identifies two type of agreements. Horizontal agreements which are among the companies who are or may compete within the same business. Second is the vertical agreement which are among independent enterprises. Horizontal agreement is presumed to be illegal, but it would be applicable for vertical agreements.

Abuse of dominant position

There shall be an abuse of dominant position if an enterprise directly or indirectly unfair or discriminatory conditions of purchase or production of goods or services. The provisions relating to abuse of dominant position require determination of dominance in the relevant market. [14]


The Act is designed to regulate the operation and activities of combinations, a term, which contemplates acquisition, mergers or amalgamations. Combination that exceeds the threshold limits specified in the Act on terms of assets or turnover, which is likely to cause adverse impact on competition within the market in India, may be pollinated by the Commission.

Competition Commission of India

Competition Commission of India [15] is a corporate body and independent entity possessing a common seal with the power to enter into contracts and to sue in its name. It is to consist of a chairperson, who is assisted by a minimum of two, and a maximum of ten, other members. [16] [17]

It is the duty of the Commission to have recourse to adversity, and to protect the interests of consumers and ensure the freedom of trade in the markets of India. The Commission is also required to give an opinion on the subject of competition and to raise awareness of the issue.

Commission est un point de l’enfranchise et un controle dans les abuses de l’enfranchise et de l’inde

  • An agreement has been executed outside India
  • Any contracting party resides outside India
  • Any enterprise abusing dominant position is outside India
  • A combination has been established outside India
  • A party to a combination is located abroad.
  • Any other matter or practice or action arising out of such agreement or dominant position or combination is outside India.

To deal with cross border issues, Commission is empowered to enter into Any Memorandum of Understanding or arrangement With Any foreign agency of Any foreign country with the prior approval of Central Government.

Review of orders of Commission

Any person aggrieved by an order of the Commission may apply to the Commission for its order of date. The Commission may consider the application of the application of the application of the application. The order of the chair is given to the executive director when he or she is invited to the chair. [18]


Any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Commission may be appealed to the Supreme Court within the scope of the decision. No appeal shall lie against any decision or order of the Commission made with the consent of the parties. [19]


If any person fails to comply with the requirements of the Commission, the Commission shall be punished with respect to the maximum amount of the fee for that purpose. [20]

If any person does not agree with the orders or directions issued, or if not liable to this fine, it shall be punishable with imprisonment for a period of not more than 25 years. or with both.

Section 44 provides for the use of a person, a person or a person who is a member of the family which will not be less than ₹ 50 lakhs but which may extend to ₹ 1 crore.

See also

  • National Competition Policy (India)
  • Competition Commission of India


  1. Jump up^ “Sub-section 1 of Section 7 of the Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon . Retrieved 3 November 2015 .
  2. Jump up^ “CCI will be in full operation next year” . The Hindu . 2007-09-11. ISSN 0971-751X . Retrieved 2015-11-19 .
  3. Jump up^ The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1969 . Georg Thieme Verlag.
  4. Jump up^ Pathak, Akhileshwar (2016-04-18). “New law, statutory body imperative to foster fair trade practices in India” . Livemint .
  5. Jump up^ Singh, Ravi Karan (1989-01-01). Restrictive Trade Practices and Public Interest . Mittal Publications. ISBN 9788170991724 .
  7. Jump up^ The Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act 1969 . Georg Thieme Verlag.
  8. Jump up^ Legal Aspects of Business . Tata McGraw-Hill Education. 2013-01-01. ISBN 9781259026584 .
  9. Jump up^ “Competition Bill introduced” , The Hindu , 6 August 2001
  10. Jump up^ “Section 2 (a) of the Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  11. Jump up^ “Section 2 (c) of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  12. Jump up^ “Section 4 (explanation) of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  13. Jump up^ “Section 4 (explanation) of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  14. Jump up^ “Section 4 of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  15. Jump up^ “About CCI | Competition Commission of India” . . Retrieved 2015-11-19 .
  16. Jump up^ “Organogram | Competition Commission of India” . . Retrieved 2015-11-19 .
  17. Jump up^ “` CCI to act as nodal agency to check anti-competitive practices ‘ ” . The Hindu Business Line . Retrieved 2015-11-19 .
  18. Jump up^ “Section 37 of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  19. Jump up^ “Section 40 of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.
  20. Jump up^ “Section 43 of Competition Act 2002” . Indian Kanoon.