Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

4.2.38 GSFC has further stated that its main and prime object is to carry out liaison work with the government, to research, to improve the methods of cultivation, to impart training and seminars, to provide training and assistance. it is the member of National Federation of Co--operative Sugar Factories Ltd., New Delhi and if any question pertaining to national level arises, it makes use of National Federation for representation before concerned Ministry to resolve such problems and difficulties faced by its member sugar factories. On the basis of the above facts, it has been contended by GSFC that it has no need or requirement to being a part of any informal body for such problems. Federation since established and registergefld has never 9,, . M' interfered in sale of sugar by our member sugar factoriéf» . O"

4.2.76 Godavari Sugar Mills Limited has also submitted that the mail'

1. ll; :3 .5, meeting dated 22.07.2010 was on the point of approaching gove nnfiyent,-:in»vi'ew T, \ ' s. 1' K '§j' gr '.:'\ increasing sugar cane price and declining sugar prices below cost of producit>ien,,ope«ni,ng' / M/ 47 up of export, un--remunerative levy sugar Price, packaging of sugar, ethanol price as fixed by the government, problems faced by the sugar factories in harvesting & transportation of sugarcane in Maharashtra, Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka and Gujarat. During the meeting, representatives of various sugar factories expressed their views about various problems faced by the sugar industry. This meeting was held essentially to exchange ideas and brainstorm to find out solutions to the problems faced by the Sugar Industry. The views expressed were personal and were not binding on anybody. The meeting being informal in nature, there was no resolution passed or any decision made in the said meeting. Therefore, there was no agreement or intention, either oral or written or express between the parties and that no provision of the Competition Act is violated.

4.2.77 Shri Gurudatt Sugars Ltd. has submitted that they attended the meeting only with a view to get acquainted with the problems faced by the sugar industry and the ways and means under which a redressal could be possible to those problems. Any decisions made by the Maharashtra Rajya Sugar Sangh Ltd. Mumbai were not binding on it nor were they ever acted upon.

4.2.78 As has been stated by other respondents, it has been replied by the company that suo-motu note action taken by the Commission is without jurisdiction in as much as the commodity in question, namely sugar, is an essential commodity governed by the provisions of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955, and the Sugar (Control) Order, 1966 made there under, and thus, falls outside the purview of the Competition Act, 2002.

5.80 The Commission notes that the contention of sugar mills in course of proceedings has been that they were facing a problem of excess production and declining sugar prices as compared to their cost of production in 2010. Thus, it cannot be said that sugar mills had limited the production in order to influence the overall market. DG has also recognized this fact in his report and has submitted that since the production in Karnataka and Maharashtra had risen sharply as compared to previous year, the problem of declining prices was more acute in those states. This was the reason, according to DG, that maximum participation in the meeting held on 22.07.2010 was also from these two states in order to find ways to overcome the problems. Once it is recognized that the production had gone up as compared to previous year and there are regulatory controls of the government over releases in the market, it cannot be maintained that agreement among the sugar mills aimed at limiting or controlling the production or supplies or market of sugar.