Case No. 2/2010 - File No. (1)/(2)/2010-Sectt.. Case: Cinergy Picture (P) Ltd. Vs ETC Network Ltd.. Competition Commision of India

Case NumberCase No. 2/2010 - File No. (1)/(2)/2010-Sectt.
Party NameCinergy Picture (P) Ltd. Vs ETC Network Ltd.
IssueCompetition Act, 2002 - Sections 4(2), 19(1), 26(1), 26(2) and 33
Judgement DateMarch 02, 2010
CourtCompetition Commision of India

Order:

  1. The instant information has been filed against the opposite party under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002. It is stated that the informant has produced a cinematograph film by the name 'Rann' and this movie was slated to be released in public on 29th January, 2010. According to the informant, the movie has a social message in public interest and with a view to informing the public about the misuse and abuse of media, the informant published a 12 page advertisement through the newspaper titled as 'Rann Times'.

  2. It is further stated that the opposite party is one of the leading broadcasters and broadcasts various television channels in the name of 'ETC'. As per the informant ETC is an entertainment oriented channel which also provides information on the entertainment events like movies. It is also stated that ETC channel is promoted by Zee network which has a dominant position in the television entertainment channels market and since it has national as well as regional television channels, it has the capacity to influence the consumer opinion. It is alleged that the informant did not advertise trailer of its movie 'RANN' with the ETC channel and therefore, with a vengeful attitude, the opposite party in its programme 'Movie Meter' rated the movie poorly before its release by awarding it 3 points out of 10 and on the other hand, gave higher rating to the movie 'Ishqiya' which had given its trailer for advertisement to it. It is alleged that by adopting the vote meter method, the opposite party has curtailed the right of the informant to the audience for the movie and by publishing/telecasting the regarding exhibition, distribution and exploitation of the movie. The informant has attributed malafides on the part of the opposite party and also the motive to cause damage to the informant because it did not choose to advertise the movie on the platform of ETC. On the basis of above mentioned allegations, violation of Section 4(2)(c) and 4(2)(e) of the Competition Act has been alleged.

    3, The informant has prayed that:

    (I) the opposite party be restrained and be ordered to cease and desist from publishing/telecasting any report, assessment, comments which undermine the movie or its performance and further restrain it from projecting the movie negatively in any manner whatsoever and direct it not to abuse its dominant position in a manner to harm and hurt the interest of the complainant as regards the movie "RANN";

    (II) the...

To continue reading

Request your trial