CCI dismisses complaint against Emaar India over Marbella villa project

Fair trade regulator CCI has dismissed a complaint alleging abuse of dominance and anti-competitive practices by Emaar India Ltd and others in connection with its "Marbella" villa project in Gurugram.

"The Commission finds that no prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act is made out against the opposite parties in the instant matter," according to an order passed by the Competition Commission of India (CCI).

Section 3 and 4 pertain to anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position, respectively.

The case was based on a complaint filed by an informant who alleged that Emaar India Ltd, its group firm Emaar India Community Management, and several government departments including the Department of Town and Country Planning, Haryana, and the Union of India through DPIIT have violated the Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act.

The complainant alleged that Emaar misused its dominant position by permitting construction of builder floors and non-villa residential units on 97 vacant plots within zones 1 and 6 of the project.

The villas were originally promoted as part of an exclusive "Signature Villa Community."  According to the complainant, this was in breach of commitments made in brochures, buyer agreements, and conveyance deeds, which projected a homogenous luxury villa society.

It was further alleged that the introduction of builder floors disturbed the uniform design and exclusivity of the project, imposed unfair conditions on existing villa owners, and amounted to abuse of dominance under Section 4 of the Act.

CCI observed that several major developers such as DLF, Godrej, Tata Housing, Signature Global and Vatika Group were also active in the villa segment, offering alternatives to consumers.

However, the regulator is of the view that prima facie OP-1 (Emaar India Pvt Ltd) does not appear to be dominant in the relevant market of 'the provision of services for development and sale of villa in Gurugram'.

In absence of dominance of Emaar India in the relevant market, there is no requirement to examine the allegations of abuse of dominance. Hence, there can be no case of abuse of dominance in terms of Section 4 of the Act.

The competition watchdog is of the view that no case can be made out against these entities under the provisions of the norms, the regulator said.