COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA versus CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE OF ARTISTS AND TECHNICIANS OF W.B. FILM AND TELEVISION AND ORS.

Citation: [2017] 5 S.C.R. 1 · Decided: 07-03-2017 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: A.K. SIKRI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

[2017] 5 S.C.R. 1 
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA 
v. 
CO-ORDINATION COMMITTEE OF ARTISTS AND 
TECHNICIANS OF W.B. FILM AND TELEVISION AND ORS. 
A 
(Civil Appeal No. 6691 of 2014) 
B 
MARCH 07, 2017 
[A. K. SIKRI AND ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE, JJ.) 
Competition Act, 2002: 
s.3(3)(b) - Violation of- Scope of jurisdiction of Competition 
C 
Commission of India (CCI) - Telecasting of dubbed serial 
'Mahabharat' in Bang/a language - Telecasting of serial not 
palatable to EIMPA(an Association of producers in Eastern India) 
and Committee of Artists and Tech_nicians of West Bengal Film and 
TV Investors (Coordination Committee), as in their perception D 
dubbing of serials of other language in Bang/a would affect 
producers, artists and Technicians of that region _.:Pursuant thereto, 
broadcasting channels received letters from EIPA and Coordin"ation 
Committee to stop the telecast of the dubbed serial and that non-
compliance would result in non-cooperation from these two bodies 
- Respondent No.2 informed CCI about the development and sought · E 
action in the matter - Majority view of CCI was that EIMPA and 
Coordination Committee imposed/attempted to impose restrictions 
on the telecast of dubbed serial and this was in violation of provisions 
of the Act - However, minority view was that the action and conduct 
of both EIMPA and Coordination Committee did not violate any 
F 
provisions of the Act - EIMPA by its conduct accepted the majority 
opinion - But, Coordination Committee went on appeal to 
Competition Appellate Tribunal, which affirmed the minority view 
of CCI - On appeal, held: Both EIMPA and Coordination Committee 
acted in a concerted and coordinated manner, together they gave a 
call to boycott the competing members - Decision of these two bodies 
G 
reflected collective intent of the members - Thus, the matter could 
not have been brushed aside by merely giving it a cloak of trade 
unionism - It is clear that acts of Coordination Committee caused 
harm to consumers by depriving them from watching the dubbed 
serial on TV channel and prevented competing parties ilt pursuing 
H 
2 
A 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2017] 5 S.C.R. 
commercial activity-It hindered competition in the market by barring 
dubbed TV serials from exhibition on TV channels in the State of 
West Bengal - It amounted creation of barriers to the entry of new 
content in the said dubbed TV serial - Therefore, such act and 
conduct amounted to violation of the provision of s.3(3)(b) of the 
Act. 
s.2(r), (s) - Relevant market - Telecasting of dubbed serial 
'Mahabharat' in Bang/a language - Broadcasting channels received 
letters from EIMPA(an Association of producers in Eastern India) 
and Committee of Artists and Technicians of West Bengal Film and 
TV Investors (Coordination Committee) to stop the telecast of dubbed 
serial in that region - Minority view of CCI was that 'relevant market' 
was broadcast of T. V. serial and not T. V. industry of West Bengal 
and broadcasting of it took place through different broadcasting 
services, which is different from production, distribution of films -
Held: Jn the instant case, the geographical market is the State of 
West Bengal and to this extent activities of Coordination Committee 
were limited to the said State - Even as per agitators/Coordination 
Committee, the said broadcast was going to adversely affect the TV 
and Film industry of West Bengal - Thus, the relevant market was 
not limited to broadcasting of the Channel but the entire film and 
television industry of West Bengal. 
Trade Unions - Regional T. V. and film industry - Association 
of producers in Eastern India (EJMPA) - Committee of Artists and 
Technicians of West Bengal Film and TV Investors (Coordination 
Committee) - Coordination Committee contended - (i) that dubbing 
of serials of other language in Bang/a would affect producers, artists 
and Technicians of that region - (ii) it had nothing to do with the 
competition and as a trade union, it had the fimdamental right to 
lodge the protest - Held: In instant case, Coordination Committee 
(or for that matter even EJMPA) are, in fact, association of 
enterprises (constituent members) and these members are engaged 
in production, distribution and exhibition of films - Matter cannot. 
be viewed narrowly by treating Coordinate Committee as a trade 
union, ignoring the fact that it is backing the cause of those which 
are 'enterprises' - Decision of these two bodies re

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.