The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed allegations of bid-rigging against Aegis Logistics Ltd and its associated firms, Indus Petro Chem Ltd and Sea Lord Containers Ltd, citing a lack of evidence.
The case, initiated by an anonymous informant, accused the three companies of collusively participating in a tender issued by the New Mangalore Port Trust (NMPT) for leasing 85,000 square metres of land for storage facilities.
The informant alleged that the companies, despite being controlled by the same management, submitted separate bids in a manner designed to manipulate the auction process, constituting a violation under Section 3(3) of the Competition Act, 2002.
According to the informant, the alleged cartel led to an appreciable adverse effect on competition (AAEC) by rigging the tender process. The complainant had sought penalties, a ban on the companies from participating in public tenders, and the cancellation of land allotment.
However, after reviewing the case, the CCI ruled that there was no conclusive proof of collusion or bid manipulation. The commission noted that while the three companies are related entities, common ownership alone does not establish cartelisation unless backed by material evidence.
CCI cited previous rulings such as the Ved Prakash Tripathi and Reprographics India cases, where it had held that common directors or business linkages do not automatically imply anti-competitive practices.
Additionally, the response from NMPT clarified that the initial tender was cancelled not due to allegations of collusion, but to enhance competition through wider participation. The revised tender process saw participation from multiple bidders, and CCI observed no conclusive pattern indicating bid-rigging.
With no substantial evidence of anti-competitive conduct, CCI decided to close the case under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act. The ruling underscores the commission’s stance that allegations of cartelisation must be supported by clear evidence rather than mere corporate linkages.
This decision marks a significant moment in competition law enforcement, reinforcing the principle that companies with shared ownership structures can legally compete in tenders unless proven otherwise. The ruling provides relief to Aegis Logistics and its associates, allowing them to continue business without regulatory restrictions.