Will Complete Investigation In Case Related To Google Play Store Payments Policy Within 60-Days: CCI Informs Karnataka High Court

Additional Solicitor General N Venkatraman said, "Yesterday, CCI heard an application filed by DG Investigation and he has given an assurance that he will complete the investigation in 60 days."

The Commission thus requested the court to close the petition filed by Google India Private Limited challenging an order of the Commission dated December 14. ASG Venkatraman said, "They (Google) should cooperate in the investigation and continue with their assurance of deferring the payment programme, let them not advance the date. With this assurance we can close the proceedings."

Senior Advocate Gopal Subramanium appearing for the tech giant said, "As has been assured earlier, the Google play billing system will not be brought into effect till Oct 31, 2022. My client's have instructed that the position is resolute. ASG may take note of it." He added that, "As regards cooperating with the investigation we have cooperated and produced 9,000 pages of documents and we will further cooperate." He also agreed that the matter can be closed.

A single judge bench of Justice Krishna S Dixit directed the parties to file a joint memo and posted the matter for further hearing on January 10.

The company had approached the court challenging an order of the Commission by which it rejected Google's request for access to the identity of app developers/start-ups allegedly suffering harm on account of Google Play store payments policy 2020 and directed it to file its reply to the application filed by Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF), by December 31, failing which it shall proceed with the matter.

The plea filed through Advocate Dharmendra Chatur, Advocate Manu Kulkarni and Poovayya & Co. Sanjanthi, said that the impugned order violates principles of natural justice. It constrains the petitioners to defend the ADIF IR Application - which is predicated on an assertion of irreparable harm, while simultaneously denying the Petitioners the right to know the identity of the parties that they are alleged to have harmed.

Further it states that, "Forcing the Petitioners to defend the ADIF IR Application blindfolded cannot comport with natural justice, such restraint is premised on mere speculation that the Petitioners would retaliate against the complainants, a theory the Commission adopted without any reasoned order or hearing."

It is also said that, "The Commission failed to appreciate that withholding information relating to the identity of the relevant app developers/start-ups denies the Petitioners their right to defend themselves effectively, including their ability to verify the particulars of the harm alleged."

The Impugned Order disables Google's ability to test the bona fides of ADIF's claim to represent the entities that are alleged to require interim relief. The Impugned Order denies Google the right to determine whether the complainant entities are in fact among the very small percentage of Indian app developers/start-ups that may be affected by the non-urgent measures that are sought to be restrained (which Google estimates to be less than 1 percent).

The plea thus prayed for directions to the Commission to protect the petitioners' constitutional, statutory and due process rights and set aside the impugned order. In the interim, the petitioners seek to stay further proceedings in relation to ADIF's IR Application before the Commission and also grant a stay of the operation of the impugned order.

Case Title: Google India Private Limited v. Competition Commission Of India

Case No: WP 24277/2021