NATIONAL COMPANY LAW APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Allows Withdrawal of Appeal in Competition Matter — Appellant Faces Operational Challenges. The Tribunal permitted the appellant to withdraw the appeal due to severe operational impacts affecting its ability to continue litigation 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 case involved Meru Travel Solutions Pvt Ltd as the appellant against the Competition Commission of India and others as respondents. The appellant filed an appeal against an order dated 20.06.2018, which disposed of information submitted 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's counsel submitted that the company faced severe operational impacts and revenue challenges, making it unviable to continue the litigation. Consequently, the management decided to withdraw the appeal. The respondents' counsel indicated no objection to the withdrawal. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, allowed the application for withdrawal and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn. The decision underscored the appellant's right to withdraw in light of operational difficulties.

Headnote

A) Competition Law - Withdrawal of Appeal - Appellant's Right to Withdraw - Competition Act, 2002, Section 26(2) - The appellant sought to withdraw the appeal due to operational difficulties impacting its ability to continue litigation. The Tribunal allowed the withdrawal unconditionally, dismissing the appeal as withdrawn. Held that the appellant's circumstances justified the withdrawal (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The Tribunal allowed the application for withdrawal and dismissed the appeal as withdrawn.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 dismissal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (NCLAT) (05) 142

IA NO.3309 /2026 IN COMPETITION APPEAL (AT) No.6 5 /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

Right to withdraw appeal Impact of operational challenges on litigation

Submissions/Arguments

Appellant's counsel argued for withdrawal due to operational difficulties. Respondents' counsel had no objection to the withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The Tribunal recognized the appellant's right to withdraw the appeal in light of operational difficulties impacting its ability to continue litigation.

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 dated 20.06.2018, admitted on 22.07.2019, and the application for withdrawal was moved on 12.05.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Competition Act, 2002: Section 26(2)
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Increases Compensation for Workman in Employment Dispute — Court Directs Payment of Balance Amount. Citing the need for fair compensation, the court adjusted the amount awarded to the appellant while allowing the possibility of a fres...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Quashes Conviction in Murder Case Due to Insufficient Evidence and Unreliable Dying Declarations. The court found that the dying declarations lacked corroboration and were inconsistent, failing to establish the appellant's guilt under S...