ARTICLE
1 August 2024

XYZ vs. Ola Electric Limited, VIDA: Hero MotorCorp Limited, TVS Motors And Ather Energy Private Limited (Case No. 31 Of 2023 Decided On 23 January 2024)

PL
Pioneer Legal

Contributor

Pioneer Legal is a new age law firm with a dynamic approach to revolutionize the legal landscape in India. We excel in providing commercially viable legal solutions in tandem with high happiness quotient for our attorneys and clients.
An individual (requesting to keep his identity hidden) had filed the present case before the Commission alleging that Ola Electric Limited...
India Antitrust/Competition Law
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

An individual (requesting to keep his identity hidden) had filed the present case before the Commission alleging that Ola Electric Limited, VIDA: Hero MotorCorp Limited, TVS Motors and Ather Energy Private Limited (collectively, referred to as the "Defendants") were (A) taking undue and illegal advantage of the Faster Adoption and Manufacturing of Electric and Hybrid Vehicle Policies ("FAME") a subsidy policy launched by Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises which directly aims at promoting the electric vehicle sector in India; and (B) indulging in predatory pricing. One of the eligibility criteria for availing benefits under FAME was that the maximum ex-factory price of the electric two wheelers ("ETW") is to be INR 1.5 lakhs per ETW.

However, it was alleged that the Defendants were selling essential and integral equipment such as charger and proprietary software at an additional cost, bringing the effective price up to INR 1.6 to 1.8 lakhs per ETW; and that such predatory pricing led to genuine manufacturers being deprived of the opportunity to avail the benefit under the FAME subsidy and consequently an adverse impact on competition in the relevant market.

The Commission stated that the relevant product market and relevant geographical market would be the market for 'manufacture and sale of ETWs in India'. Additionally, after thorough analysis, the Commission stated that none of the Defendants had a stable market share.

Based on the aforesaid, the Commission concluded that: (a) the EV sector in India was in the growth stage and the competition would only intensify with time; and (b) there was no single player able to exert market power in its favour or operate independently of market forces. Therefore, the Commission found no prima facie case of contravention of the provisions of Section 4 of the Competition Act, 2002 by the Defendants.

Originally published 05 April 2024

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More