A bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal directed Attorney General R. Venkatramani to seek instructions from the CCI on whether it would agree to have all cases heard by a single-judge bench, as per Karnataka High Court Rules, with the option for appeals to a division bench.
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday, December 13, declined to transfer 24 writ petitions filed by Amazon and Flipkart-associated sellers in various High Courts against the Competition Commission of India’s (CCI) probe into alleged anti-competitive practices to a division bench of the Karnataka High Court.
A bench comprising Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal directed Attorney General R. Venkatramani to seek instructions from the CCI on whether it would agree to have all cases heard by a single-judge bench, as per Karnataka High Court Rules, with the option for appeals to a division bench.
Justice Oka emphasized that CCI should not receive special treatment by bypassing procedural norms, stating, “Only because some litigant is to be given special treatment, bypass the rules, we can’t place it directly before the division bench.”
The Court was hearing the CCI’s plea to transfer the writ petitions from various High Courts to the Supreme Court.
During the proceedings, Justice Oka questioned the necessity of involving the Supreme Court and suggested consolidating the cases in one High Court.
The Attorney General (AG) highlighted that the inquiry was going for four years due to litigation, proposing two alternatives: transferring all cases to the Delhi High Court or allowing the Karnataka High Court’s single judge to conclude the hearings, with further appeals directly to the Supreme Court.
However, Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi opposed bypassing intra-court appeals in High Courts.
Justice Oka proposed transferring all cases to the Karnataka High Court, but the AG requested they be heard directly by a division bench to expedite resolution, citing public interest.
Justice Oka reiterated that “no litigant should bypass procedural steps”.
The AG defended the CCI’s position, arguing the delay undermined public interest and consumer rights, while Singhvi accused the CCI of “forum shopping.”
The Court adjourned the matter to Monday (16th Dec) to allow the AG to provide conclusive instructions.
Background
The CCI launched the investigation in January 2020 under Section 26(1) of the Competition Act, 2002, following a complaint by the Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh, alleging Amazon and Flipkart favored select sellers, disadvantaging competitors. In June 2021, the Karnataka High Court dismissed writ petitions by Amazon and Flipkart challenging the probe, a decision upheld by a division bench and later by the Supreme Court.
In August 2024, the CCI’s investigation concluded, finding violations of competition laws, including preferential treatment for select sellers and exclusive product launches. Multiple petitions challenging the CCI’s probe were filed in High Courts across the country, prompting the CCI to seek consolidation of cases to avoid delays.
The Karnataka High Court is set to hear related petitions on December 17.
FOLLOW US FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES ON YOUTUBE
