Bar & Bench had in March, reported that the spat between the Competition Commission of India (CCI) and Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) may reach the Supreme Court in the SAIL vs. Jindal case.

As predicted the CCI has filed an appeal against the order of the COMPAT. The appeal is the first of its kind and will be the first time the Supreme Court of India will be asked to look into certain provisions of the Competition Act. The CCI although established in 2003, was made operational only in September 2009.

The original case was between Jindal Steel and Steel Authority of India (SAIL)-two of India's largest steel manufacturers. It involved a certain agreement for railway equipment between the Indian Railways and SAIL, which was allegedly an anti-competitive agreement and amounted to an abuse of dominance by SAIL. Jindal approached the CCI to investigate the anti-competitive practices of SAIL and Indian Railways.

The Commission decided that there was a prima facie case for investigation and recommended that the Director General (DG) commence an investigation. Before the DG could commence its investigation, SAIL moved the COMPAT appealing against the prima facie order of the Commission, which recommended the commencement of an investigation.

Senior Advocate Jagdeep Dhankar represented SAIL. Jindal Steel were represented by Senior Advocate C.A. Sundaram who was briefed by Lead Litigation Partner and Competition Practice Head at Amarchand Mangaldas Pallavi Shroff and Senior Associate Shweta Shroff.

The Chairman of COMPAT, Justice Arijit Pasayat allowing the appeal had stayed the investigation. The order also interpreted the provisions of the Competition Act in a manner such that SAIL was entitled to appeal from the CCI’s prima facie opinion order; and in doing so, also held that the Commission was not to be impleaded as a party in any appeals before the COMPAT. It also held that the CCI was duty-bound to record reasons for recommending the initiation of an investigation.

Economic Laws Practice (ELP) represented the CCI before COMPAT and is now representing the CCI before the Supreme Court. The Delhi Litigation Partner Tarun Gulati and Competition Partner Samir Gandhi lead the ELP team and are being assisted by Senior Associate Neil Hildreth.

The appeal is currently being scrutinized by the Supreme Court Registry for defects and will be duly taken up and listed once the process is completed.

Reference: (Case No.11/2009)