Case No. 57/2010. Case: Best Xerox Centre, Properitor Smt. Sunder Jain, represented through authorized representative Sh. R.C. Jain Vs Xerox Modi India Limited. Competition Commision of India

Case NumberCase No. 57/2010
Party NameBest Xerox Centre, Properitor Smt. Sunder Jain, represented through authorized representative Sh. R.C. Jain Vs Xerox Modi India Limited
IssueCompetition Act, 2002 - Sections 3, 4, 19, 19(3), 19(4), 26(1) and 26(2); Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996
Citation2011 CompLR 38 (CCI)
Judgement DateDecember 02, 2010
CourtCompetition Commision of India

Judgment:

1 The present information has been filed under Section 19 of the Competition Act, 2002 by M/s. Best Xerox Centre through its sole proprietor Smt. Sunder Jain (hereinafter referred as informant) against Xerox Modi India Limited (hereinafter referred as OP) for alleged abuse of its dominant position by unilaterally changing the terms of arbitration agreement between them.

  1. The Brief facts of the case are as follows:

    2.1 The informant purchased a Xerox machine priced Rs. 8,05,800 from the erstwhile Modi Xerox Co. Ltd., in 1997. The grievance of the informant is that the condition regarding the appointment of arbitrator and the venue of arbitration was changed by the OP in its Full Service Maintenance Agreement (FSMA) on 11.12.1997 as compared to the conditions mentioned in proforma invoice/ sale invoice dated 30.09.1997 and 21.11.1997.

    2.2. The terms regarding the arbitration clause as per the proforma/sale invoice dated 30.09.1997 and 21.11.1997 are as under:

    In the event of any dispute or difference arising between the parties pertaining or arising under this contract, the same shall be referred to the arbitration of a board of arbitrators compromising one nominee each of MX and the customer and an umpire to be appointed by the arbitrators before entering upon the reference. The venue of such arbitration shall be head office of MX, presently at Hemkunt Tower, 98, Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019.

    While amended clauses of FSMA are as under:

    In the event of any dispute or difference arising between the parties pertaining or relating to this Agreement, the same shall be referred to the arbitration of a sole arbitrator appointed by the Chairman of the board of directors of MX or by a person designated / authorized by him. All proceedings of such arbitration shall be governed by the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 or any amendments thereof The venue of such arbitration shall be the head office of MX, presently at Hemkunt Tower, 98 Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019.

    Only the Courts at Delhi shall have exclusive jurisdiction to adjudicate any disputes between the parties arising from this agreement.

    2.3. It is alleged that the opposite party has thus misused its dominant position which is apparent from comparing the conditions of arbitration given in the proforma / sale invoice and the FSMA. The informant alleges that at the time of selling the machine, the opposite party deliberately incorporated very liberal terms to lure the consumer...

To continue reading

Request your trial