Bar&Bench News Network
Mumbai based Bachubhai Munim and the Mumbai office of Economic Laws Practice (ELP) will be arguing on the jurisdiction of Competition Commission of India (CCI) before the Bombay High Court. Vijay Mallya-owned Kingfisher Airlines has moved the Bombay High Court challenging CCI's investigation into the code sharing agreement between Jet Airways and Kingfisher Airlines.
The division bench comprising Chief Justice Swatanter Kumar and Justice AM Khanwilkar will hear the CCI plea which has engaged a heavy duty Senior Counsel list. Attorney General Goolam E. Vahanavati and Senior Counsel Andhyarujina who will argue along with ELP's Litigation Partner, Vikram Nankani and Competition Law Partner, Suhail Nathani along with Senior Associate Madhur Baya.
The CCI had initiated investigation in August 2009 to look into the October 2008 alliance between Jet Airways and Kingfisher. The complaint before the CCI was filed by a frequent flier who alleged that the alliance would lead to the formation of a cartel.
Kingfisher's stand is that since the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC) is already looking into the alliance, the CCI investigation will only duplicate the process, and secondly, that the agreement was completed before May 2009 when the CCI was notified. Milind Sathe, Counsel for Kingfisher along with the name partner of Bachubhai Munim & Co., Atul Munim are representing the airline, while Government Counsel Rui Rodrigues is representing the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and others.
It is interesting to see a heavy duty panel engaged by a Government body. High time that Government bodies engaged professionals to defend its claims and actions before the Courts. While a bevy of Senior Counsels may not necessarily strengthen a weak case, it surely lends a certain amount of credibility.
|
Be the first to post a comment 
Related Stories
- Competition Commission eyes Jet-Kingfisher Alliance, investigates DTH operators
- Airlines' woes continue as BPCL files winding up petition against Kingfisher
- Kingfisher besieged by creditors: Bombay HC orders 3.6 crore deposit as dues to Lufthansa
- Competition Commission in action: DTH operators, Kingfisher and banks investigated for 'anti-competition' practices
- ELP secures yet another order for CCI: SC refuses to stay a probe by the CCI into the alliance between Kingfisher Airlines and Jet Airways
- Competition Act gives CCI wide powers: Conversation on slapping a fine of Rs. 1 crore on Kingfisher with Samir Gandhi, Partner Economic Laws Practice
- M &A market heats up: Crawford Bayley advise Wall Street Finance in its acquisition by Spice Corp
Other News
- Re-Upped Round up May 21
- Clasis Law moves to a larger office space in Delhi
- Re-Upped Round up May 18
- SC to hear petition challenging appointment of sitting AP High Court judge; Petition alleges deliberate concealment of pending criminal investigation at the time of enrollment
- Linklaters Managing Associate Pranav Sharma to rejoin Amarchand Mangaldas as Partner
- Re-Upped Round up May 17
- Recruitment Tracker: Luthra top recruiter followed by Amarchand and AZB for NALSAR Class of 2012
The Viewpoint: Indemnification Provisions - Is the fight on the indemnity clause worth the effort?
May 17, 2012 | Bar & Bench brings to you the twentieth article on 'The Viewpoint' series with its Knowledge Partner AZB & Partners. AZB Senior Associate Nandish Vyas and Associate Pranati Ishwar in this article seek to examine the context in which indemnification rights are relevant for acquisition transactions, and also seek to explore if there are areas where they are potentially not worth the comments (4)










