National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Dismisses Appeal as Withdrawn Due to Operational Difficulties. Tribunal Allowed Unconditional Withdrawal of Appeal Under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002.

Tribunals: National Company Law Appellate Tribunal Bench: NEW DELHI
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose in the context of Competition Appeal (AT) No. 63/2018, where Meru Travel Solutions Pvt Ltd challenged an order of the Competition Commission of India dated 20.06.2018, which disposed of information filed by the appellant on 02.06.2017 under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002. The appeal was admitted by the Tribunal on 22.07.2019. The appellant faced severe operational impacts that affected its revenues and ability to continue with the litigation, prompting its management to decide to withdraw the appeal. The respondents did not object to this application for withdrawal. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, allowed the application and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The decision underscored the Tribunal's recognition of the appellant's difficulties and the unopposed nature of the withdrawal request.

Headnote

A) Competition Law - Withdrawal of Appeal - Unconditional Withdrawal - Competition Act, 2002, Section 26(2) - The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal due to severe operational impacts affecting its ability to continue litigation. The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal application, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as withdrawn. Held that the appellant's request was unopposed by the respondents (Paras 1-4).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the appellant can withdraw the appeal against the order of the Competition Commission of India.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Tribunal allowed the application for withdrawal and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.

Law Points

  • Withdrawal of appeal
  • Section 26(2) Competition Act
  • 2002
  • Unconditional withdrawal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 141

IA NO.3308/2026 in Competition Appeal (AT) No.63/2018

2026-05-12

Justice Yogesh Khanna, Mr. Ajai Das Mehrotra

Mr Udayan Jain, Mr Abir Ray, Ms Kajal Sharma, Mr Vivek Pandey, Mr Ranjan Mishra, Mr Sasthibrata Panda, Mr Harsh J, Ms Biyanka Bhaba, Ms Nisha Kaur Uberoi, Mr Sarthak Pande, Ms Akrathi Shetty, Mr Rohan Bhargava, Mr Srihars h Peechera, Ms Shruti Aggarwala, Mr. Samar Bansal, Mr Rohan Arora, Mr Aman Singh Sethi, Mr Shivek Endlaw, Ms Saachi Keile

Meru Travel Solutions Pvt Ltd

Competition Commission of India & Ors

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Appeal against an order of the Competition Commission of India.

Remedy Sought

The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal.

Filing Reason

The appeal arose from an order disposing of information filed by the appellant.

Previous Decisions

The appeal was admitted on 22.07.2019.

Issues

Whether the appellant can withdraw the appeal against the order of the Competition Commission of India.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that operational difficulties made it unviable to continue litigation. The respondents had no objection to the withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal recognized the appellant's operational difficulties and allowed the unconditional withdrawal of the appeal under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002.

Judgment Excerpts

The application is allowed and the appellant is permitted to withdraw the present appeal unconditionally. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as withdrawn.

Procedural History

The appeal was filed against an order of the Competition Commission of India, admitted on 22.07.2019, and subsequently, the appellant moved an application to withdraw the appeal.

Acts & Sections

  • Competition Act, 2002: Section 26(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeals in Religious Institution Dispute — Upholds Trial Court's Findings. The court found that the appellants failed to establish a prima facie case for an injunction, and the Mathadhipathi seat could not be relinquished be...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Conviction in Murder Case to Culpable Homicide Not Amounting to Murder. The court found that the incident arose from a sudden quarrel, warranting a lesser charge under Section 304 IPC.