- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Artificial Intelligence
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- Environmental, Social, and Governance
- Foreign Direct Investment
- Food and Beverage
- Gaming
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- In Focus
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- IP & Tech Era
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Student Corner
- Take On Board
- Tax
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Viewpoint
- Zoom In
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- Middle East
- Africa
No Competition Issue, CCI Dismisses Complaint Against Nestle India
No Competition Issue, CCI Dismisses Complaint Against Nestle India
Introduction
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed a complaint against Nestle India Limited, alleging that its factory in Bicholim, Goa, used dirty water in the production of Maggi Sauce.
Factual Background
The complaint was filed by Sarvesh M. Kolumbkar, who alleged that Nestle India's plant used a "dirty water extraction pump from an under-construction site" in the manufacturing process. He also claimed that bottles were falsely labelled to suggest hygienic production, which misled consumers.
Procedural Background
The CCI considered the complaint and examined the allegations under the Competition Act, 2002. The Commission held that the matter concerned food safety issues and not competition law.
Contentions of the Parties
Complainant : Alleged that Nestle India's conduct violated the Food Safety and Standards Act, 2006, and amounted to abuse of dominance under Section 4 of the Competition Act.
Nestle India: No specific response mentioned.
Reasoning and Analysis
The CCI found no substance in the claims from a competition law perspective. It clarified that the case related to food safety, hygiene, and product labelling, which fall under the jurisdiction of the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), not the CCI. The Commission noted that issues of consumer protection and product safety require the attention of sectoral regulators, not the CCI.
Decision
The CCI closed the case under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act, 2002, holding that there was no competition issue arising out of the present case. The Commission also rejected the request for interim relief.
Implications
The decision highlights the importance of distinguishing between competition law issues and sector-specific regulations. It also emphasizes the role of sectoral regulators in addressing issues related to consumer protection and product safety.



