The Supreme Court Today (Aug 4) stayed Testbook’s legal battle against Google over its Play Store billing policies, stopping the Madras High Court case for now. The decision could impact app developers and digital platforms across India.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court of India stayed a civil case filed by ed-tech company Testbook Edu Solutions against Google India in the Madras High Court.
This case was about Google’s billing policy for apps on the Play Store.
A Bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan passed an order staying the Madras High Court’s decision that had allowed the case to go forward for full hearings.
This stay was given after Google filed an appeal challenging the High Court’s order dated June 11.
Earlier, the Madras High Court had rejected Google’s application under “Order VII Rule 11” of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) – which is used to dismiss a case at the initial stage.
Google had argued that the case should be dismissed because it was “barred under the Competition Act and the Payment and Settlement Systems Act (PSS Act).”
However, the High Court had said that:
“Testbook has raised contractual issues that fall within the jurisdiction of civil courts and cannot be shut out at the threshold under the Competition Act or PSS Act.”
Now, with the Supreme Court’s intervention, that High Court ruling has been paused. This means the hearings in the Madras High Court will not continue for now.
About The Case
Testbook, which runs more than 700 mobile apps for government exam preparation, filed the lawsuit in July 2023. It challenged Google’s two billing policies – the “Google Play Billing System (GPBS)” and “User Choice Billing (UCB)” – which require app developers to pay service fees between 15% and 30%.
Testbook argued that these policies were “a unilateral novation of its agreement with Google” and that they were “contrary to public policy” and caused “undue economic duress” on app developers. The company also claimed it could lose up to 26% of its revenue because of these charges.
Testbook further said that Google had gained market power by “offering services for free over several years.”
The company also opposed Clause 15.3 of Google’s Developer Distribution Agreement (DDA), which says that if a developer disagrees with Google, their only remedy is to stop using the Play Store.
Testbook claimed this clause was “arbitrary and violative of the Indian Contract Act.”
Google’s Stand
Google argued that the case was not maintainable because it was covered under the “Competition Act and the Payment and Settlement Systems Act (PSS Act).” The company said that similar suits by other developers had been dismissed earlier by the High Court.
Google also relied on the “exclusive jurisdiction clause” in the DDA and past court decisions to argue that the case should be thrown out.
But the Madras High Court had earlier found that Testbook’s case was different. It said the claims were about “in personam, contractual issues, including waiver and tortious interference” and not about “abuse of dominance” under the Competition Act.
It had also rejected Google’s defence based on the PSS Act and exclusive jurisdiction clause.
- Google was represented by Senior Advocates Harish Salve and Sajan Poovayya.
- Testbook was represented by Advocate Abir Roy from Sarvada Legal.
CASE TITLE:
Google India Digital Services Vs Testbook Edu Solutions.
Would You Like Assistance In Drafting A Legal Notice Or Complaint?
CLICK HERE
Click Here to Read Our Reports on CJI BR Gavai
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Google
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
