CCI gets 21 merger filings in Oct, highest in four years

The Competition Commission received 21 filings seeking approval for mergers in October, the highest number for any month in the past four years.
CCI has the mandate to keep a tab on unfair business practices across sectors while mergers and acquisitions beyond a certain threshold requires its approval.
In a tweet, CCI said it received "21 merger filings in October 2015 -- largest number of filings in a month in past four years".
CCI Member Augustine Peter said there has been an increasing trend in combination filings in the recent past.
"This indicates that investors are increasingly turning positive about the Indian economy," he told PTI.

Meanwhile, the regulator is in the process of introducing electronic filing facility for enterprises seeking nod for mergers and acquisitions.

In July, CCI had revised its combination regulations as part of its efforts to make the process simpler and more transparent.
According to the regulator, the amendments provide greater clarity and certainty with respect to M&A filings and will help in avoiding undue delays in the approval process.
So far, the Commission has dealt with more than 300 cases related to mergers and acquisitions.
With the fear of their applications getting cancelled,
CCI said the buyers would not have any choice but to abide by all the terms and conditions put forth by DDA such as making all payments beforehand as well as agreeing to pay huge penalty for any lapse on their part and receive no or little compensation for any misconduct on part of the Opposite Party.

Opposite Party (OP) refers to DDA in this case.
"Rendering the buyers in such helpless situation, causing such an exceptional delay, imposing one-sided conditions, OP's overall behaviour in dealing with the buyers are all evidence of unfair conduct of the OP qua its customers," the order said.
Among others, CCI said that asking buyers to pay up to 80 per cent of the consideration amount vide allotment letter and thereafter determining their eligibility also amounts to an unfair and one-sided conduct.
Details relating to the eligibility of the informant's wife could have easily been asked for earlier, before issuing the allotment letter, it added.