i called the following number ([protected]) for several times at 17:21hrs on[protected]....but he didnot answer any of my questions at all...
he just disconnects the call..
i m very much irritated and angry by such a response from your side..
i think its my resposibility to inform you.....
-----Ashish Saha
[protected] Was this information helpful? |
n During the trial, DLF threatened cancellation of allotments to the complainants, which the CCI stopped through an interim order on September 20, 2010.
n DLF tried to get out of the trap by challenging the jurisdiction of CCI before the Competition Appellate Tribunal, but failed as COMPAT directed the CCI to proceed.
n DLF raised the issue of CCI’s jurisdiction by pointing out that the case was arising from contracts signed by the allottees in the year 2006 etc, before the enabling provision in the Competition Act came into force in May, 2009.
n DLF tried to suppress the investigation report by the director general by filing a writ petition in the Delhi High Court. The court did not oblige DLF, but directed CCI to allow DLF to inspect the report.
DLF vigorously argued throughout the case that it was not in a dominant position as defined under the Act, looking for various loopholes in the Act to pull off an escape. This is despite various pronouncements and postulations in its annual report and at different fora, where it claims to be the largest property developer in the country and boasts of being the dominant player. It is only when such information was used against DLF that it started crying foul