# In the matter of Amit Mittal vs. DLF Ltd. & Ors., Competition Appeal  (AT) NO.82 OF 2018

> NCLAT judgment dated 2022-12-21. Citation: TCN-2022-NCLAT-00008. The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Competition Commission of India…

- **Court:** NCLAT
- **Order date:** 21 Dec 2022
- **Citation:** TCN-2022-NCLAT-00008
- **Category:** IBC
- **Source page:** https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/amit-mittal-vs-dlf-ltd-ors-competition-appeal-7a5d6f43

## Summary

### Background

The case involves an appeal against an order passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) in Case No. 73/2014. The appellant, Amit Mittal, filed an information application under Section 19 of the Competition Act, 2002, alleging that certain clauses of an agreement between him and DLF New Gurgaon Home Developersl Pvt Ltd were violative of the provisions of Section 4 of the Act, which prohibits abuse of dominant position. The CCI initially directed the Director General (DG) to conduct an investigation, and the DG submitted a report indicating a violation of Section 4. However, the CCI subsequently directed further investigation, and the final order concluded that no contravention of Section 4 was established, leading to the closure of the case. The appellant

…

## Facts

Amit Mittal, the appellant, filed an information with the Competition Commission of India (CCI) alleging that DLF Ltd and DLF New Gurgaon Home Developersl Pvt Ltd (respondents) abused their dominant position by imposing unfair clauses in an agreement for the allotment of an apartment in 'Regal Garden', a residential township in Gurgaon. Mittal had applied for an apartment and paid 10% of the sale price as booking amount. He claimed that the agreement contained clauses reflecting abuse of dominance, which were unfair and discriminatory. The CCI initially directed the Director General (DG) to investigate the matter, and the DG submitted a report indicating a violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act. However, the CCI subsequently directed further investigation, and

…

## Issues and analysis

### Issue 1: Whether the CCI was justified in directing further investigation after the initial DG report …

**Ratio:** The CCI has a limited jurisdiction to direct further investigation under Section 26 of

…

**Reasoning:** The court reasoned that Section 26 of the Act provides a specific procedure for inquiry

…

**Interpretation:** Section 26 of the Competition Act outlines the procedure for inquiry on

…

**Application:** In this case, the initial DG report indicated a violation of Section 4.

…

## Parties

- **Judges:** Rakesh…; Ashok Kumar…
- **Appellants:** Amit Mi…
- **Respondents:** DLF New Gurgaon…; DLF L…

## Timeline

- **2012-03-03 — Apartment Al…**: Appellant was allotted apartment…
- **2012-09-01 — Apartment Buyers…**: Apartment buyers…

---

This is a preview. The full structured summary, issues, precedents and source judgment are available on CaseEase - Legal Intelligence Simplified: https://caseease.in/cases/ibc/nclat-new-delhi/amit-mittal-vs-dlf-ltd-ors-competition-appeal-7a5d6f43