DLF business conduct again found 'unfair, abusive'

Image
IANS New Delhi
Last Updated : May 14 2015 | 10:57 PM IST

Realty major DLF has been found to have indulged in "unfair and unjust" business practice again by the country's anti-trust body that, nevertheless, said it was not imposing any fine due to a Rs.630 crore penalty that had already been slapped on the company in a similar case.

In a 49-page order delivered on Wednesday but made available a day later, the Competition Commission of India directed DLF and its group companies to "cease and desist from indulging in the conduct which is found to be unfair and abusive" in terms of the provisions of prevailing anti-trust laws.

It also said that since a penalty of Rs.630 crore had already been imposed on DLF in what is referred to as the Belair's case -- as also for the same period for which the contraventions in the present cases were made -- no financial penalty was required.

"In view of the totality and peculiarity of the facts and circumstances, the commission does not deem it necessary to impose any penalty on the Opposite Party in these cases," said the order of the Competition Commission, chaired by Ashok Chawla.

Earlier, the Competition Appellate Tribunal (COMPAT) had dismissed DLF's appeal against the Rs.630 crore penalty levied by the Competition Commission, finding merit in what the resident welfare association had said -- that company had abused its dominant position in the Gurgaon market.

As per the case filed, the two original appellants had booked an apartment each in "DLF New Town Heights" in 2008 since they had found the rates, as mentioned in the scheme's pre-launch, attractive. They were allotted one apartment each.

Subsequently they received reminders for payments. But they alleged it was clear that the construction work had not started and DLF was only collecting huge amounts from the allotees and buyers who had booked the apartments with them.

The appellants also sought cancellation of the allotments and a refund. But they were told that the only option before them was to sell the apartments. Subsequently, two years after the booking, they were told by the builder that the foundation work had been completed and that they should pay up.

In view of what they thought were unfair and onerous terms, the appellants sought an inquiry.

A third complainant had also approached the anti-trust commission alleging that DLF abused its dominant position with practices like allotment of back-to-back parking on compulsory payment of Rs.150,000, non-transparent calculation of advance payment rebate and payments toward external development charges.

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: May 14 2015 | 10:42 PM IST

Next Story