Roll No.

R154216005
SAP ID 500055158
UNIVERSITY OF PETROLEUM AND ENERGY STUDIES
Mid Semester Examination, October 2020
Open Book – Through Blackboard Learning Management System

Course: Competition Law Course Code: LLBL556

Programme: BA LL.B (Hons.) (Crim Law/ Energy Law/ Labour Law/
Const Law) Semester: IX

Time: 02 hrs. Max. Marks: 50

Instructions:
As this examination is in open-book format, the students are expected to demonstrate a very high degree of Academic Integrity
and not copy contents from resources referred. Instructors would look for understanding of the concept by the students and any
similarity found from resources online/ offline shall be penalized in terms of deduction of marks and even cancellation of paper
in requisite cases. The online examination committee of the School would also look for similarity of two answer scripts and if
answer scripts of two or more students are found similar, both the answer scripts shall be treated as copied and lead to
cancellation of the paper. In view of the aforesaid points, the students are warned that they should desist from using any unfair
means.

Instructions: All Questions are Compulsory.

S. No. Marks CO
1 With the passage of time there is a complete paradigm shift in the market structure
and competition law and new horizons of the same has been emerged. On the basis
of abovementioned statement discuss.
(a) Why there was entire shift from Competition Act 1969 to Competition Act 15 CO1
2002? (7.5Marks).
(b) Also discuss the differences between Competition Act 1969 and Competition
Act 2002. (7.5Marks).
Ans. a- The competition act of 1969 or the MRTP act as it was referred then was actually
lagging behind in the current industrial world the new concepts of predatory pricing,
bid rigging and abuse of dominance were not covered or mentioned under the mrtp
act which made the this particular legislature out of touch to the contemporary issues
of the markets anti competitive practices although it could be argued that such
practices could just be added to the pre existing pools of the anti competitive
practices yet the specific distinction to these principle warranted a change in the act.
Also when the MRTP act was instituted in 1969 it was based on the trade and
economic patterns of that time and with the growing change in the trade practices it
was held that it would be preferable to change the whole legislature rather than
 amending almost all of its provisions.
b- There are several differences between the mrtp act and the competition act 2002.

1 The objective of the mrtp act is to regulate the restrictions in the trade while the
competition act also protects the interest of the consumers in the market and makes
the market open for new inductions.
2 The mrtp act provides for 14 offences which are violative of the principle of
natural justice while the competition act only provides for 4 offences.
3 The mrtp act concluded the company which was at dominant position as bad while
the competition act does not inherently makes the dominant entity as bad but only if
it abuses such dominance in the market.
4 The competition act provides for concept such as the bid rigging and abuse of
dominance while these are foreign concepts to the MRTP act.

2 Udit a rich businessman form Kanpur, dealing in wood furniture decided to leave the
traditional brick and mortar market and therefore he entered into e -commerce
market. In order to eliminate competition & to build a strong position in the market
Udit entered into storage, supply & distribution agreement(all of these are exclusive
agreements) with “ZapperFry” a leading e-commerce player selling furniture online.
A complained has been filed against Udit to CCI, alleging that these practices are
15 CO2
anti-competitive and also have an appreciable adverse effect on competition. On the
basis of abovementioned facts discuss the following
a. What do you mean Appreciable adverse effect on competition and also
discuss the relevant factors to adjudge the same?
b. Also Explain whether these practices adopted by Udit fall under the criteria
of create an appreciable adverse effect on competition.
Ans. a) The Appreciable adverse effect is an evolved concept:-
Firstly the MRTP act inherently termed the dominant entity as bad then after
amendment the acts of such entities were termed as adverse then after further
discussion it was decided to see the effect on the markets of these acts to
currently adjudicate it these effects are called as Appreciable adverse Effect.
THese effect have to be checked against the core provisions the competition
act which include:-
- Anti competitive practices prohibition
- Prohibition of Andti dominant position
Factors to adjudge if the agreement has Appreciable adverse effect it should
have following effects-
 1 creation of barriers to new entrants in the market
2 Driving existing competitors out of market
3 accrual of benefits to the consumers.
4 Restricting competitions by hindering entry into market

B) The above example has to be checked against sec 3 of the competition act which
checks anti competitive practices it provides that no enterprise shall:
- make agreements of improving supply , production and distribution which
has appreciable adverse effect.
- Promotion of technical, scientific and economic factor by means of
production , supply or distribution of the goods.
Now in this current example by making agreements to distribute and produce with
the intent to remove competitors out of the market will create an appreciable adverse
effect on the competition.

3 There is no absolute parameter to Judge the term “relevant market” and the
traditional concept now a days has become redundant since the horizons of market
has totally been changed. Rohan a business person dealing in dairy products, selling
products via physical shop and also via e-platform and has a good hold in both the
markets. On the basis of abovementioned facts discuss the following. 20 CO1
a. What do we mean term Relevant Market and what are the factors to adjudge
the relevant market?
b. Also discuss whether the above case constitute a single or two different
relevant markets all together, since the product, person both are same?
Ans. a) As per Sec 2(r) it means the market which may be determined by the
Commission with reference to the relevant product market or the relevant
geographic market or with reference to both markets.
Relevant product market-
In determining relevant product market CCI considers the following:
1 Physical character of good or its end use
2 Price of services and good.
3 Consumer preferences
4 Classification of industrial products.
Relevant geographic Market: It means the area in which goods have the same
prices taking into account that transport and increase in demand can be met.
To consider these markets CCI considers the Regulatory trade barriers,
transport costs , and national procurement policies.
B) The above answer has two criteria if we check under the relevant product
market it would constitute a single market as it meets all conditions of CCI under
relevant product market while if we check under the relevant geographic market it
would split in two different markets as the transport and the distribution would
change drastically.

I, ABDULLAH, understand that submitting work that isn’t my own may result in
failure in this paper and I may also be subject to Disciplinary Proceedings as
per the Academic Integrity policy of the University.