Home Case Index All Cases Companies Law Companies Law + AT Companies Law - 2021 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (11) TMI 304 - AT - Companies LawReduction of the competition to its electors by creating indirect entry barriers into the profession of legal service - whether the Second Respondent/ ‘Bar Council of India’ comes within the ambit of ‘enterprise’ as per Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, 2002? - HELD THAT:- Undoubtedly, the definition of ‘enterprise’ is very wide and the definition does not only cover those institutions connected with activities pertaining to goods but also covers activities relating to provisions of ‘services’ of any kind, which gives a very broad connotation to the range of activities that can be covered in the definition of the ‘services’ - any entity to come within the meaning of ‘enterprise’ as per Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, 2002 that it is or has been engaged in any ‘activity’ of the nature defined therein. Moreover, the activities mentioned in the Section 2(h) ‘enterprise’ of the Competition Act, 2002 have to be ‘Economic’ and commercial in character. Also that the words employed in preceding the words ‘any activity’ reflect not only regularity and continuing of activities made mention of in the Section. It is crystalline clear that the Second Respondent/ ‘Bar Council of India’/ Statutory Body has its primordial role to perform its duties and hence, this ‘Tribunal’ without any haziness holds that the Second Respondent/ ‘Bar Council of India’ is not an ‘enterprise’ having any economic and commercial activity. The First Respondent/ Competition Commission of India are not of any economic and commercial/business activity and further that keeping in mind yet another fact that the Second Respondent/ ‘Bar Council of India’/ Statutory Body, which is to perform its role as a Regulatory one, cannot be said by any stretch of imagination that the ingredients of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 ‘abuse of dominant position’ are attracted in the present case, with a view to consider the same, as opined by this Tribunal - the view taken by the First Respondent/ Competition Commission of India in the impugned order dated 20.01.2021 in Case No.50 of 2020 stating that there existed no prima facie case as per Section 4 of the Competition Commission Act, 2002, not granting any interim relief as per Section 33 of the Act and ultimately rejecting the case are free from any legal flaws. Appeal dismissed.
|