9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (1) TMI 1756X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Competition X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... foresaid reads as follows: "This appeal filed against order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the Competition Commission of India (for short, 'the Commission') in Case No. 71 of 2913 is illustrative of how the appellants have become victim of rivalry between different factions of Karnataka Chemists and Druggists Association (Respondent No. 3) and they have been penalized by the Commission under Sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e aggrieved persons have moved before the Hon'ble Supreme Court in appeal. If that be so, we are of the view that the appellants and respondents both sides will be governed by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as may be rendered. No further decision is required to be rendered in this appeal." .... Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Commission submitted that by judgment dated 28 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Counsel appearing on behalf of Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association. From the order dated 28.07.2016 passed by the Commission in case No. 71/2013, which was under challenge, it is clear that the Commission on perusal of the records has come to a definite conclusion that there was anti-competitive arrangement/understanding between M/s Lupin Ltd and Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 'Karnataka Chemists & Druggists Association' cannot be accepted. Further in the present case, as we find there is no error apparent on the face of the records and that no new fact has been brought to our notice, we hold that the review application is not maintainable. This apart, this Appellate Tribunal having already observed that the Appellant and Respondents will be covered by the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
