SC denies special treatment to CCI, refuses to transfer all probe petitions

Refusing to transfer writ petitions filed in various high courts by Amazon- and Flipkart-associated sellers against investigation by the Competition Commission of India (CCI) into alleged anti-competitive practices to itself, the Supreme Court on Friday said the antitrust body “cannot not be given special treatment”. The top court instead suggested to consolidate all cases with the single judge of the Karnataka High Court, who is already hearing some of these cases. The matter will again be heard on Monday.

 

“Only because some litigant is to be given special treatment, bypass the rules, we can't place it directly before the division bench," the Supreme Court said.

 

 

The Supreme Court was hearing the plea filed by the CCI, seeking transfer of 24 writ petitions filed in various high courts challenging its probe into alleged anti-competitive practices to the top court.

 

A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal directed Attorney General for India (AGI) R Venkatramani, appearing for CCI, to take instructions on whether the antitrust body agrees to transfer all cases to a single-judge bench of the Karnataka High Court, where some of the cases are already pending.

 

Justice Oka said that the CCI could not be given a preferential treatment by transferring all petitions to be heard by a division bench instead of first being heard by a single judge as per the Karnataka High Court Rules. Parties aggrieved by the single-judge decision can then appeal to the division bench, he said.

 

During the hearing, Justice Oka asked why the matter should be brought to the Supreme Court, instead of it being consolidated in one high court.

 

AGI Venkatramani said CCI's probe has been stalled for four years now due to ongoing litigations. But Justice Oka pointed out that in similar instances, the Supreme Court had previously transferred all cases on a single issue to one high court.

 

The AGI then proposed to either transfer all matters to the Delhi High Court to be heard by a division bench, or allow the Karnataka High Court single judge to conclude the hearings soon. He said after the Karnataka High Court finishes hearing the matter, the aggrieved parties can approach the Supreme Court.

 

Senior Advocates Abhishek Manu Singhvi and Mukul Rohatgi, appearing for respondents, objected to this, saying that directly approaching the Supreme Court would bypass an intra-court appeal in the high court.

 

The matter is related to the CCI investigation of 2020 under the Competition Act, 2002, following a complaint by the Delhi Vyapar Mahasangh, a traders' association, alleging that Amazon and Flipkart gave preferential treatment to certain sellers, which were closely linked to the platforms.

 

In June 2021, a single judge of the Karnataka High Court dismissed writ petitions filed by Amazon and Flipkart challenging the probe.

 

In August 2024, the CCI found that Amazon and Flipkart had violated competition laws by favoring select sellers and launching exclusive online products in collaboration with smartphone manufacturers such as Samsung and Vivo.

 

Amazon- and Flipkart-associated sellers have filed petitions in Karnataka, Punjab and Haryana, Delhi, Madras, Allahabad and Telangana high courts, challenging various aspects of the CCI's investigation.