- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
NCLAT rejects Karnataka film body's plea against CCI ruling
NCLAT rejects Karnataka film body's plea against CCI ruling
Refuses to intervene citing evidence of anti-competitive conduct
A division bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has dismissed an appeal filed by the Karnataka Film Chamber of Commerce (KFCC) against the Competition Commission of India (CCI) ruling.
The bench comprising Justice Rakesh Kumar and Kanthi Narahari held that in 2018 CCI had found that KFCC acted in a concerted manner impeding the entry and screening of the dubbed movies in Karnataka. The conduct violated the provisions of the Competition Act, 2002 that proscribe anti-competitive agreements.
The investigation was ordered by the CCI based on the information filed by film producer and distributor G. Krishnamurthy in 2017.
He alleged that KFCC was causing hindrance to his Tamil movie originally titled 'Yennai Arindhal' from being released in Karnataka post-dubbing as 'Satyadev IPS.' He also accused KFCC of inducing public protests.
The director-general found that KFCC was acting in concert and impeded entry and screening of dubbed movies. The commission's panel agreed with the findings and in August 2018 imposed a penalty of Rs.9.72 lakh on KFFC. It was further ordered to bring in place a Competition Compliance Manual to educate its members about basic tenets of the competition law principles.
Aggrieved by the ruling, KFCC appealed before the NCLAT. It stated that the impugned order failed to appreciate there was neither any adverse effect on competition nor evidence of any collusive act by it.
However, dismissing the plea, the tribunal noted that there was ample evidence to show the existence of anti-competitive conduct by KFCC.
The bench stated, "The order passed by the CCI is in accordance with the law and does not warrant any interference by this tribunal."