Case No. 37/2012. Case: CA Sreeram Murthy Vs Shrirarn Chits Ltd.. Competition Commision of India
| Case Number | Case No. 37/2012 |
| Judges | Ashok Chawla (Chairman), H.C. Gupta, Member (G), Dr. Geeta Gouri, Member (GG), Anurag Goel, Member (AG), M.L. Tayal, Member (T), Shiv Narayan Dhingra, Member (D) |
| Issue | Competition Act, 2002 - Sections 19(1)(a), 26(2), 4, 4(2) |
| Judgement Date | October 04, 2012 |
| Court | Competition Commision of India |
Judgment:
-
The present information was filed by Sh. Sreeram Murthy ('the informant'), a chartered accountant by profession, under section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 ("the Act") against Shriram Chits Fund Limited ('the opposite party') alleging contravention of section 4 of the Act. As per the information, the Opposite Party is alleged to have auction turnover of around Rs. 3000 crores and is stated to be the largest in the chit fund business in India. It is alleged by the informant that the opposite party was abusing its dominance by misleading the consumers through various anti-competitive practices in contravention of section 4 of the Act.
-
It is the case of the informant that sometime in the year 1993, he participated in a chit fund of Rs. 25,000/- for a total period of 5 years managed and run by the opposite party by paying Rs. 500/- per month, however, without knowing much about the intricacies of chit laws and rules. Subsequently, he invested in three more chit funds in the year 1996, of the value of Rs. 25 lacs for each chit for a period of 50 months vide ticket nos. 35, 26 and 30 in chit group BLX-01 by paying Rs. 50,000/- per month.
-
It was further stated in the information that the prize money of the ticket No. 35 was released in October, 1996 and thereafter, the informant deposited the said prize money in fixed deposit with the group companies of the opposite party. Subsequently, the informant experienced hardships when he was to receive the prize money in the remaining two chits in the year 1997 (ticket No. 26) and 1998 (ticket No. 30) from the opposite party. The informant submitted that there was no arrear on any prize or non prized chits when the prize money of the third chit i.e. ticket No. 30 was to be released to him. However, in May, 1999, the opposite party denied the release of prize money of some chits in time. According to the informant, the opposite party released the aforesaid prize money after two months, as per its convenience and exercised the right of lien without taking consent of the informant or giving any notice of the same to the informant.
-
Further, it is alleged that the opposite party started adjusting the fixed deposits of the informant (the prize money of ticket No. 35 of BLX 01 was converted to fixed deposit by informant), which the informant had with the group companies of the opposite party and gradually declared the informant as defaulter with effect from October, 1999 coupled with...
To continue reading
Request your trial