CCI rejects complaint of cartelisation in a Rlys tender

The Competition Commission has rejected a complaint against six entities, including Eastern Railways, alleging them of indulging in anti-competitive ways with regard to a tender for procuring pulleys.

Quadrant EPP Surlon India had alleged that six entities acted as a cartel and enjoyed the ability to control the supply of bearings, among others. The six entities against whom the complaint was filed were INA Bearings India, Schaeffler Technologies AG & Co. KG, Eastern Railway, Durga Bearings, V M Automation and Monika Bearing Traders.

The allegations were related to a tender for procurement of diverse quantities of pulleys with bearings (of INA make) and retainer rings. The notice inviting tender was issued in April last year through Indian Railways e-procurement system. The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has ruled that there is no prima facie evidence to seek a probe by its investigating arm director general.

"In the present case, the opposite parties are not engaged in identical or similar trade of goods but are positioned vertically in the chain of production in different markets and hence, no case of cartel is made out," the order dated May 27 said.

Quadrant EPP Surlon India is into manufacturing, marketing and supply of semi-finished engineering plastic products made through nylon monomer castings. INA Bearings India is the wholly-owned subsidiary of Schaeffler Technologies AG. Eastern Railway inter alia manufactured '140T Brake Down Cranes' for Indian Railways.

Durga Bearings and V M Automation are authorised dealers of INA Bearings India. Monika Bearing Traders is authorised stockist of V M Automation.

According to CCI, the requirement of INA brand bearings was not absolute in the tender document and there was no restriction as to the persons or class of persons from whom goods could be procured.

"... it was made out that neither did the tender document impose a condition which limited/restricted the supply of bearings to only that of INA brand nor did the Opposite Party (INA Bearings India) hold any dominant position in the relevant market.

"Hence, the allegation that opposite parties contravened the provisions of Section 4 of the Act was not prima facie made out," it noted.