Competition Commission of India
Varca Druggist & Chemist & Ors vs Chemists And Druggists Association, ... on 11 June, 2012
Cemeeséséesrfiemmisssfiean ef Kndfie MRTP Case Nth C~12"z'f380'3.'C>G?IR {4f'38",3 Verse Srasggist & Chemist 8: Qthers informant Chermsts Se. Dmggésts Associatéen, Goa _ Oepgsosite Party As Per R. Preset} {ciissentinel E have gene through the ereers guessed by the majerity of the members :3'? the Cemmissien. E have a different view and am therefore passing a separate eraier. The feats are stated in the order :3? the majority and there is he need to repeat them.
2.. The first issue is the egiseiiceeiééty ef Section 3 es the Competitien Act. The scheme is' the entire Cempetiticm Ace, 2632 is against meeepeiy or deminence. This is dune either by entering into eeticompetitive agreements which is Semen 3 ef the act. §3€i"S{'.}§'}S whe do not have sufficient ciemieemfze or marketjeeonomic power enter 'snte enticempetitive agreements sea as to ceiieciiveiy acquire menepely power. Antieompetitwe espeects of such agreements are defined 'in Sectien 3 and the feature to dete-rmine such enticenwpetitivse activities are described in Sectien 19(3) :31' the Act' Bemieence or menepeiy power can else be acquired by ecquisitien er merger and emefigemetions. These are the subject matter fer ceesideretien in Sections 5 and 6 ef the Act, The factors to be seen for 'seentifying the eencentration as eeenemic pcwer are mentiened in Sectien EGQ4) ef the Act. Under Sections 3,, 3 and 6 :2? the Act, Commission is required to esEe'is7i?£s§?é'T'~e preciame adverse effect can cenwpetitien. But when dee}if{ " A eeimhgzence an 'Section £1, the Cemmissien is not required tge est?" ewggsaseeziabie adverse effect on cernpetitien. Qnte dominance is eeteirraiished in e reieverit market, then under Section ii eraiy the abuse needs to be exeminerfi.
3. New, Cflmiflg to the issue at heme 'Let the eppiicetion er' Section 3 at the Act, we i"iE3_V€3 ta examine the previeiene, Aercereing to the previsieriss, pereens er enterprises cannot enter irate an agreement in riespect at euepiy, eterege, distribution at gems and previsione of services whim creates era eppreeieeie adverse on cerripetitien. if err eppreciebie effect on cemeetitiien is caused then the agreement ts mid. But weutci an eggreemient entered irste by entergzrieee ize form en eesoeietien weuid be an agreement in respect et restriction on eupeiy, sterege, jdietribetitm at geoes and prexrieitmr. 0'? services. "the egreernent envisaged in Section 3 is not an agreement to form an eeeeszietiert but are egreerrzertt which creates an eppreciebie etiveree er: cemeetitiera. E ttierefere tie net egree that tree eeeecietien was fermeri with the idea at gaining ~E{Z{3i"i€}i"¥'i§C eewer and creating en adverse effect on cemeetitient The egreernerzt referred to in Section 3 ie not the agreement te term at: eeseczietien. it is er:
egreerrsent which ieeds he an enticempetitive behaviour in the markets. it the rriemerertdum at CDAG is eeeri, it 'weuid shew that the agreement te term the eseeeietien was net tr) Create Ar'3.EC in the rneritett Forming era eeeecietien fer the weitere of 'iliié members is e cenetittitienei right guaranteed under Articie 19 at the Cerietitutien :3? indie. ii' the argument that the eesecietien was termed with the idea at gaining ecenomic pewer.
then eii the trade eeseeietiens termeci weiuirzi have tr) be treated as veici tinder Sectien 3(2) of the A<:.t., By farming a trade eeeecietion, {me gets eczerzomir: strength and may be a position of sstrengttr and cierriinerzrze. But the agreements referred tie in Sectien 3(1) are different agreements between eriterpréeee which are entered 'mte with the motive at causing epereciebie adverse effect on competition in Eraciie. if a view is taken that , .\ \ ~\~._ ,_. ,\ ' e: eement hit by the prtwisiene the fermatien of a trade eesecie},:i~tE{§:r of Sectiien 3 then. it has te t§e~ e 'e;i:tig\et such are eeeecietion is causing an apererziebie edver'e§§3,'\\.e:'-frjfect ;;::or§§.§:e§titiion in indie. ' \ "' is 1
4. if we ieokis si: the definitiam of persen. in Sectien 2{_i) ef the Act, then e soeieim; registered under" izhe Eéeeieties Act is a person._ Thereiflsre from this definition ii: is ciear that time infiE'fifi-E0" of the iegisiatui'e was to reecigsnize the fDF§T'at'¥On 0? such secieties or associations esfihpersen am such agreements is ferm such societies were met the suhjiect matter ei' the rigours mi' Seetien 3 sf the Act. Once the iew treats an entity as a g:3es'scm, the Cemmissicms is net entities its treat such a gserserfs iormatien for an inquiry under Section 3 ei' the Act.
5. Semen 281) of the Act defines an enterprise as a persenmer e gevemment department. In indie, we are net gevemed by the Eumgtaeen er American eempetition iews where a person is not eefinee. In such e case, the fermetiee at" such an esseciation iizseii' may be quesitiened as an 'enticempetiizive agreement. But: in India thee issue is different. in the ease sir" iiindustee Lever Ltd. AER 1§71 Si': 1285, the Supreme CQUi"iZ has ignited sewn ugzzsen the intemtien sf auizherities to iooie; at the iews fereign jurisdiction when there is me requirement as em' iaws are szziear.
E3. Further, as the esseeiatiori in this case is a person, it came: enter into an agreement with we self 0:" take a eiecisien uniieteraiiy er imiiiaiereiig: have practices so as is be hit by the pmvisiens sf Sectim 3 ef the A=::i:. 'Fer Seetien 3, there has get its es mere than one persen. As in this case there is eniy ene persen, as sanctioned by iew under Sectien 2{i'_} of the Act, Section 3 has he aepiicaizien. V Zr'. The ezguesizioin fer examinatien is that when such a igersen is e>mii3ii;irzg antiicemeeizitive behsvieur, whet weuie be tiie eroeedere ice cieai with such behavieer under the pmvisiens cf the Compeizitirm Act, 2092.
in this pariziceiar case there is ne "\\§'3e\sociiety CBfi\C:3's fermiaticzm . . 3' . \ , .
§nCi"*'3E§S'$3ij the eeenemse strengtigs' eiifgit: ' Ji"EiK\ai§ei'"S, simekists and the wheieseiiers dealing with if}: \'\_ within the territoriei x s ./ 9.2 juriscjéction of Goa, This society'/asmciation had no statutew backing fer running it:.=s affairs but it started regutating the trade m the state of €305. This was pczssibie for the association to do SE3 because it couidA t:><:~y=::cxtt ea gfiersan and ansura that market access was denfseczé to person when did faii in iine w':1:L%} _V the ciira<:t'sves of the assaciaticm. in fact it maid _drive a person «wt of busmess by its activities. The society maid aise anéuria that a cdmgsany m;ar§<et:mg drugs in (303 »::0uk:i be cfirivsen nut Hf G03 markets if the drug marketing 3 manufacturing company did not fmiiew the ¢jirect§ves of the saciew. This couid be done by a diktat issued by the saciety that its members; wmuiyd mt deai in the drugs manufactured/marketed by the cmmgzsanies whc dial mt foiisw theldimstivesa cf the seciety. M the members wmsid than step buying and semng the szirugs £Z1'f'iIE'}£-3 deimquent cémg company and in a smart time, the drug company vmuici have ti} exit the market as' Sea. A cemgsasw trying ta» market 3:5 gaods in G023 weuici mi: be awe ta mama: the goocés in Sea as it wcukti am: he abée to. set mg: a marketing chain in $023 withmut the biessings cf the CDACL
8. Before 'cakmg the discussian further it is necessary to examine the f:.mz:tionEng 'cs? CDACS. CDAG functiens in Goa but than there is an A3: Enciéa chain Qf whokeseiiers and retaii of AH India Eevei knmvn as NE Ermiia Grganisatmn :33' Cheméats and Bruggists (AEEC¥C§3'). CDAG is affiiiated :0 A1C.':{1{) We ether state ievei a<5s»;3r::§at"s0n. in a state there are associaticms of whoéeseiiars ahci retaiiers at district Eeveis which are affitiated ta the state ievei assaciatimas. ALEOCD haci enterezti Enter) a MGR) with the Qrganiaatian csf Pharrnaceuticai Waaducts 3? india (CBPPI) anti Tmdian mug Manufacturers Association (EDNA) in 3382. Accarding to the ncrms ism dawn in the MDU marging were fixed gt the ievei sf whafiesaiiers and
- retaiier:-3. Gu'sde§§nes in the MOU have aise been mid dswsw for the appointment ca? new and aciciitécszggm stoczmsts. Further no drug .~ manufa;<:i:us'ing company maid «:3 s» retaiiers umess it fciiaweci the guicielsnes appear to t:a:'=;i~.§a*t--3s't;ra< \\ 7.
W "\. _ These guédeiiness are applicable ':0 the menufaeturere, stockists and cjistributmrs.
9. Pharmeeeuticai pmducts are marketeti in e reguiateci t3E'}£t§E-"J" the Drug Prtce €2er.m'%::s:f:,i Greer (D.iP.C.(3') issued by the Centrei ge\:etnme;:jgW Under the Wine Czmtmé Order, whenever' a drug is introciuxzteci in the market, it is fer the drug company to give infermetien ta the censumets about the drug. As this inveéves costs, the drug companies gney the eseeeietien certain sums of money to the aeeeciatierz and it is the jet: of the essecéetten to give infermatien about the j.'3§'C3C§U<:2t ta the ceneumere.
The payment is known it) be paid for Precinct Enfermetien Service {P155}.
1:}. The tD.G. has reperteci in his report that each state eeeecietien has te tetéow the geédetinee teie dawn by AZDCZQ. According to him these guitiefinee have the effect at cantreiting and Eimitting supeiiee :3'? medicinee in the market. fine at the respective faettors mentioned by the Di; is P123. The eecend anticempetitive measure referred te try the D.(3. 33 the requirement te ebtain a me ebjectien frem the state ievei association fmm the Steteffiistrict ieveé eesecietteia. Further a new steckist or e distributer has to become a member of the eesecieticm befere he can became a d¥et:*2but.er;'ete<:kEst. The State/District Eevet esseczietion can ievy fines an e stockisttfdietrieuter if he dines net fetiew the guideimes laid dawn tzythe AEQCQ/Stetejflietrtet eesecietion. Normeiiy in an area according to the AIEOCEB guidetines net mere than we stockists can be appointed. if the third eteckist E53 eppeinted it can emy be done after an aeereveé of the State esseeietien is ebtemed. Further as AEDCE3 has entered. into an agreement with £)P9E and team, if e StOC§»{'iS'E Gees not obtain a NSC, the manufacturers wcsuid mt euppiy mecficzmes te the said eteckiett Whenever, a new drug is intteeuced in the market a SS: unit, it has te be certifieci by the QPF31f1DMA. Accord' W""'t'e;\_egreement between AECBCK3 and C)§>P?{,-'f;Dt»'%fi\ whenever as new?' §';£§ in the market, 918 charges are to be paid. if the \ .) )4'-
r i pttbiieheci then no PIS-
J I 'J1 charges are peyataée by the drug czompeniee. If the baéence sheet of e SE33 unit is czertified by C)¥3Pt';'It3t'3e, the S531 unit get 50% tiisceunt on P153 ctzergee. Another abuse mtee by the LES. was the feet that no whoieseiiet couid eeii geeds tn the censumets without incurring e penalty from the essm:iat§ee..... .Eu:'ther, ea drug Ctcmpeny market drugs tfirettiy in the market te censumere/doctets. No drug cempeny ceutd eepeint any steckiet/dtetrihuter wéttzeut NQC from the asseciatien.
11. The C38. has heid in his tepert that -
fii) tisiitsg of trade margin:-3 tar stockists/distritmtm" amounts te fixing of ericess easier Sectten '3{3}{e} of the Act.
(ti) fixing of P13 charges; teads to the fixing at prices at drugs in vteietietz ef Sectétm 3(3){e) at the Act. » iiiijesa E\i.€;:.C. befere the eepeintment at eteekietsfdistritzuter teeais re reeuctien cat suppiy in the market, it is e contravention Qt' $e<:t§en 3{3}{'Cr) at the Act.
12, The first issue te txe deeitfleci is that fixing at trade margins fer eteckiste and diettibutms emeunts tr: fixing at prices in eccerdence with Section 3{3}(e) at the Act. The facts at the case are that medicmes are subject te Eseentiai Cemmeditiee Act,' $3355. under the said eat, a {Drug Wee Centmi Grciet (DPCC3) has been issued' Around 358% mecficieest are covered under this Greer. in this meet, the drugs meted are known as scheduied drugs. The other drugs not severed by the DPCO tmsier are known es nee echetiuiee drug'. At:c:or::§§ng tn the DPCO, the margin is fixettj fer the whetesetéers at 18% and for the retaitete it is fixed at 8%. This is mendetmy and eii the manufacturers, the whoteeeiiere and the retailers have tee totiew this ettiet. As far ee mm ecztzeduied c:ims_:;s; ere cememed. seem in "sts agreement with t:hte'.__§§._'5'f§§3':\ 'Ei'~tt}e em has decided that the !{--'e fer the retaiéers weuid be mergtinte fer the wheteeetiietre v\:§§;e3§.§'7.
35%, Of .. r»».._» K, ,
13. The €iLiEES'£ii3ii ti: be decided whether the fixation of the margins fer the wheieseiiers and the retaiiere by the AEOCD, the iiiiivie and the 'Ci'Pi3*'1 amounts iii} a fixation of price, In every trade wiiiie marketing gzireciuczte, dieceunts anti retietes are eiiowed te wiieiieseiiers anti reteiiers, This margin is the ecu-rce ei' texzenue tn the wheieeeiiers end the reteiiers. \'\iitiieut this systems of discounts and rebates ceiieci the margin money, the teteii chain czermet survive. This system cermet be tegercied as fixing at prices. _:i-i the case at Hindustan Lever Ltd. AER 197: SC 1285, the Stigtireme illeurt has stated that in caee cit' eemgieizitieri, mie cii' teaser: has got te be ecieetetzi. in the epinien 'per Se' mie in testietzt eat a erevisien is .
'net eppiicebie under iedien iewei 'Pet se mie' may be eppiicetiie Lii'iii€:'i' the American iegei system but it is net egzipiiizatiie in the indien iegai system. in this partictiiet ease, the margins iixeti at 29% ene ii.i.i% fer.
W§"iOi&Si3i1&i'"S and reteiiere are not unreastmebie and is iine with the eimiiar practices 'feii<:swe<:i in eiziier trades in tiie market. There is; me doubt that the margins fixed are in iirie witii the margins fixed by the DPCG order tiietigt: in the case :3? nenwsciieciuieci szjrugs the margins were fixed in accerdence with agreements entered irite by AEQCB, the EDNA and the £'>PPi. But in any case there is me tieubt that metgine fixeti fer the wiieieseiiers and the reteiiere resuit in fixing the priices oi' cirugee indiretztiy', But this tixetien' cf prices is dime by the menufeicttirere and net the essecietion CDAG. Therefore CDAG tamet tie iieid respensitiie for fixing the prices. Fi.irtiiei' eepiying the ruie at reeeen fixing the prices tn; tekiing inte eccetint thee margins times not ameunt tti iixaitien at i3i"i<:EFs under the Cemtietitien Act.
iii. The ieeue which is imeertent is the ciirectzive isstieci by CDAG that the wiieieeeiier weuiti mt give t'i'iS~:;£:)i,ii'i't tit mere than 2% to the retaiier and that the reteiiers; weuici net giveemi.
discount to the i:ensiirtier. if the wiieieeeiiet and the reteiier geye til we "feet to the reteiier and the c"
C0i":Si.ii'-.'i.€i' reegzecztiveiy they wet "e\fine::i by the essticiatieri.
This is e reetritztien on 'r"reede'i'ii The bei'iE3\'iC3i..i§' ef the "7 I aesocietiee is anti-tztmsumer. If e tetetter' wanted to gtve diecetmt to e censumet taut at its mergm at 8% far schedutieci mug or eat at H30/Q eut of net: echeduted drug, the association had me tight to stop this' Cempetitim arises when twe entities cempete wtth each ether en the basis at prices to get more eor}:tt3€3i;ite:*e, if each eompetiter is made te eeli at the same price then there weulti be me cempetitten in the market.
" Thus, by making the reteiier net to pass en the discount to the eeneumet ti: Eimits the market for e reteiier. Further try net aiéewing e whotieseiéer er a reteiier te give dieceunt te a buyer? as it is e i'€3S'C¥"tCt§¢3§'1 en the freedom of trades, it also amounts to putting ttnfeipr ceeditiene in the purchase at sate of geetie. Thee, these eetivitiee at the essecieticm are antieempetitive in eccertience Witt: the erovisiens of the Act.
15. Ttze eetztfmtis issue is the issue :3'? P38. Wtzenever a new drug is intreduced in the market, DECS eireetives requirte the drug cemeataies tt:
give infermetten ebeut the new drug te the whmeeeliets, reteiéete am the censumere. The drug ttemeeniee because they tie net aeeese te eié the reteiters, wtzeieeetiers end the consumers they pass on this duty tea the AIOCB. $03' this purpose the drug eempenies pay a sum 0?' Rs,2{3C3{3,.'~ betere intredutzing a new drug. As far as the State agencies ere concerned, they ere entities! te receive a seem at 'Rs. S00,;--~ whenever a drug cempemr intmciuces a new drug, According to MGR) between AZOCD and the tame and the OFF': if the information tmitetin is net published then the drug companies are te give any PL}; tend either to the AEQCB er the State egencies. t':t33AG fetmcté that same wtsoieseiers were making new drugs eveiiebie ta the reteiiets wttheut paying PZES charges ttz CQAG. CDAG proposed te fine the wheieseiier a stem at Re.1€}0G,f» instead at R.e,:3tTt§i3/T» eayebie as PIS. According te the E:>_.€3., the iesistence on 91.5. payments restricts the swept; and evatiabi}ftt'y et cémgs. it is not dear as ' \ to haw a emeit sum at Rs.SOG,'~ tett" em \t3?§?{Q¥€S€§i€t' at the time at introduction of a new drug fie e:tt§EEtg.%¥'i;3'e _ tts eise net ciear as to \ g2 P \\ :9 V e 1 .
how the charge of P.i.S. Reeds te en eitéfiitzuppiytet medicines in the market. it is on the basis of BIPHEVUI directive '£i'ia't at the time :31?' intreductien 03' a new drug information has tit: be given to the reitaiier and the censumer. The information he be fumisized imzetvee Casi: and if this coat, wiiiszzii is neminei, has ta he paid by a whoieeeiier, ii: dciee not ieed to reetrictien ef suppiy. Therefore the iexmigf P15 does restrict the market and is heid net to be anticempetitivei 1%. The ne:~:\': issue to be ccmsidered E3 the issue of the eeniei of marivaer accese. An issue which was; raised in the infermetien and wiiicii has eise came eei: D€3"S' report is that in See me ;:>es'sc_i_iffi win: is not a member mi' the CDAG can do business as e reteiier' er wiieieseiier. if the enterprise wants its became a wheieeeiier or e eteckist, it bag to first beiceime as member :3? CBAG and then agttspiy fer a me ebjectien certificate. W§t§'i{3i.it the ma ebjectien eertifitzete, ne drug manufacturer can make an enteiriprise either a wheieseiier er a steekist. Tiziis is en the basis; ei the M08 between AEOCD anti the EBMA enci the GVPEPE. if e menufeeterer makes S0iTl~'E:{3i"}E3 a wheieseiier er a eteckist of its 'drugs witiieui the NBC frem CDAG the reteiiere weuicl beycott the said wiieieseiier or the stockist. This happens because the reteiiere being memiaers :3'? the CBAS woeid feiiow the directives ei Ciiiefi. But the beyczett weeid drive the newiy epeeinted -
ste::i<i:st eat of business. Further when a retaiier buys metiicirzee from a ste::i<.ist,«'wheieseiier whe is as member of CDAG, eccerding is the Ci3A»:"§i guicieiiries, he is given a Credit :32" 33%;} days and after that the reteiier has to may interest at 18%, If e retaiieir is a habituai defauiter, CDAG directs the ether stecizisie mi: to suppiy meciicieee te ziriven out of business. Eat if the Si2QCi{3S'C,/W§'iOiES€-Biiei" is; net e CDAG member, CDAE ifoiiows a iziifferent peiicy. A reteiier in such a case aeiae the reiiaiiers te tai<e_e credit ei' itiiree ei fem men'-:i'2s. This eehevieair of CEAG is having a discrimiinatory i:>eiieviciur.
1?. Taking the issue ei' cieniei Q? yeiii;
pmcese starts wiizhi the MQU betweeigi-A§{.UC \ .
\ 3 Rf \\ :5 '\\' ' _ V feather 'the wiioie iici i.g§ie§ei»iA and me see}.
According to this ivitbii in a state or an area, not more than twcs SiZC3L'i4IiSi:S ceuid be appointed by a drug cernpariy. But in Gee, a drug company couici appoint five stczcitists depending or: the turnover cs? the concerned; medicines. Thus, the CDAG has iimiteci the market ta just five stcsciziets. It is aise a restriction er; the freedom. to cerzjy cm business. Further, by iimitirig the number at steckist, competiticm has been reduced and the aveiiebiiity of meciiciriess weuid aCC{)i'd§Fii§3'y' reduced.
18. it has been argued on berieit cf CEBAG that the NSC was required iri Carder ts eiimirzeize seiiers of spurieus drugs in the rri_e.ri<et. Ne meteriai has been siitsrriitteti to Si"iOW that there was a saie er' spurious target and the system of NSC tieiped in eiiminetirag such seiiers crf spuricus cimgs from the market. in fact the main aim was to reetrici: the number :32' Wi'iQiSSE3iE3i"S anti steckists sci as te ensure that there were ieseer number cit eiayers in the market sci that each stc:ci<.isi; wmsie have .23 ierger ehare cat the eie. Therefcre the arguments sf CEEAG are wittietit em; basis and ceririet be accepted. The fact its that by the action 0? CBAG the rrieri<et is iirrsited and there was a cieniei csf market access te many persons. The cieriiei oi' market access to persons te seii medicines ire the State of Sea as an irifringement at the freecicrm at trace anti iesser ccmstimer satisfaction i3ecai.rse the eveiiataiiity er the drugs decreases.
19. Ar: argument can be raised that as the CDAG does mt carry out any business, it camiot tie treated as an entercarisre under Section 203} oi' the Ccimpetiticrz Act. According to the ciefiniticm the iceywerd is carrying mat any activity. As the activity cf' CXBAG has an effect can carrying. an the business at medicines in the State at Gee, it is certainiy hit by the definiticm er enterprise as it is eiscs e {BEFSOR defined tmtier eectitm Eii) tr?' the Act. Carrying er: busiriess is net necessary for a perscm to faii under \\ confirmed by the new High court Cif:""Yi'iemant Sharma 3' '\ chess Fecieraticm, Writ Petiticm {Ci\!Ei)iJ§i 9:47 //' 1 Q 23:8. The next issue to be ciecirieri in this case is as to wnettser CDAG enjoys a dorninant position in the reievent nierket. The rneri<et has to be defined with reference to the reieven': product market or the reievent geogreohit: market or with reference to both the markets. in this oerticoier ceee the reieivant geographic rnerkei: wooio be the State of Gee.
As far as the reievent product market is concerned it means the meri<eting medicines in Goa. The position of dominance arises due to the rorrnetion of a product association for the State of Goa es weii as the ivioue entereo into by etoco with TGPPE and IDMA. Due to this coiiective oetrengtn of association Com} is eoie to operate inoeoiendentiy of oornoetitive forces orirneriiy because no competitive force is oreveiiirrg in the State of Goa. The object of the eseoeietion is to reguiete the trade of the eeie of rneoioiinee in the State of Goa. Thus the association be ebie to affect its tzoneomers in the reiexrent market in its favour. The fact is rnentioneo in Section 19(4) have aieo be considered wriiie oecidirigwrbne AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA __ issue of dominance' As for as at market share or the eeeooietion, the size and resources or the essocietion, size and importance of the competitors, eoonorriic power' of the enterprise, verticei integration of the reniterorise, coonterveiiing buying power, rnierket structure erio the size of the market is Concerned, ere the factors which cannot be seen or exernineci in this case of the association. But the consumers are depending on the rieeieions of the association and the dominant oosition has been ecouireri doe to the ooiieetive bargaining power which the association is acquired for forming the association. Therefore under oieuee {9} of Section i_§{<-i) the dominance has been acquired under the item 'otherwise. No reiative advantage acooireo in terms of ecoinomie deveiciornent by inforrning the association or by regoiefting the trade of rneoirzines in tine State of Goa. Strut es meriirzines are important for norjnen iife, social obiigetions and eooiei costs are necessary. Thereto,:fe7_;, 'oi. (jg), {ti}, {it} and {ii of Section 1%-ii) are eooiiceoie to i.-
4 an' -
S 11
21. In View of tiiesse facits the daminance caf Cm-\S is estaiaiisheci in the market of medicines in the State inf (Baa. The abuse of dcamiriance is aireiagiy established as discussed in Paras 16 and 1? cf this crirrier'. The behaviour mi' CDACE is ciiscriminamry as far as the cenditions cf purchase sate cf gmds which is medicines in this case. ThE3i"6£*f£'»if_£3 the §I)i"€}ViSiC<i'1S of Section 4i(2)(a}{i) are attracted. Tim action 0'? CDAG $350 iimitsi and regtricts the market of medicines in C393 as there i5 resatriizticm tn the eritry Of stockists and whaiesiaieirg in the State of Goa. Thereicris: the pravisicms ei' Section &i~(3){b)(i) are cieariy attracted. The -praittice fO§iCi\r'J&C§ by CEAG aim resuits in daniai 0i'_markei: access as no mine: i::an antgr the market visitiioiit mi cibgiecticm certificate: fri:3m the associatieii. 'i"hi:-irefara CDAG has cantravenad sectiztm -<i~(2){<::) cii' the Act.
22. As the abuse :3? daminance is; estaisiisiiieizi, i am in agreement with the majority View that §Ei'iE3it'§! has ta be ievied in this case. I agree with the majority View to the extent cf the geniaity ievied in this case. The ether directions issued in the order {if ma3'cii'itx; have is be foiiawed by the {ZDN3 in this izase.
23. The sacretary is ciirectaci to Send a cczpy of thi$ zirder to the cmicerned parties.
,,.w {H Piasad) iviember, CECE