1
Ref:CCI/2010/
26th February 2010
MOST URGENT
BY HAND
TO
The Hon,ble CCI
The H.T. HOUSE ,
18-20,K.G.MARG,
NEWDELLHI-110001
PHONE NOS: 011-23473400
Kind Attention:
Shri.Dhanendra Kumar -Charman
Shri.S.L.Bunker, Hon’ble Secretary
Subject ; Please refer to the personal hearing on 12.01.2010 with the CCI
Hon’ble members against your letter no.F.NO.C-78/2008-CS(10/28-CCI )
DATED 25.01.2010
Dear Sirs,
With reference to above first of all I am very much thankful to the CCI in affording
me chance to hear me for the country wide common problems of financial consumers
in respect of banking .
I have lodged my complaint on 27.02.2008 with the MRTPC which has now been
replace with CCI as on date. Even after two years MRTPC was silent on the issue due
to the reasons not known to me . [Refer page no 7 & 8 ],
I even served the notices to RBI, Banking Ombudsman, MRTPC for the Public
Interest Litigation [PIL] in the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India on 12.11.2008 [ copy
enclosed vide page nos from 9 TO 12 ]
Even request to mediate in the pubic cause issue to remove the shortcomings in the
existing Banking and finance pertaining to the laws, rules and regulatory measures
to the Govt of India as per enclosed e-mails to the PMO , F.M. , Chairman IBA and
RBI Governor 2008-2009 [ Copy of e-mails enclosed vide page no from 13 to 18 ]
Thus now my basic plea is to treat it as public interest matter so that CCI may
play a decisive role in the financial history of the nation. It is very bitter truth
that in the absence of appropriate legal framework to meet and safe guard of
Indian consumer from the dominating, discriminatory and hidden cartelization
network of the financially powerful biased particularly private banking system
between ICICI AND HDFC and followed by other bankers for their vested
2
financial interest to earn undue amount from the pockets of the innocent and
incompetent Indian consumer.
It was cited by one hon’ble member that such complained activities are not
covered even in the old and obsolete MRTPC act and I was asked to prove the
dominant position of the private bankers and the applicability of the
Competition ACT 2002 on 12.01.2010. ACT NO. 12 OF 2003 [13th January, 2003.]
Thus I am citing as under respective clauses of the said act which are applicable to the
cause of action.
under sub-section (1) of section 7; (f) "consumer" means any person who-
(i) buys any goods for a consideration which has been paid or promised or partly
paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment and includes any
user of such goods other than the person who buys such goods for consideration paid
or promised or partly paid or partly promised, or under any system of deferred
payment when such use is made with the approval of such person, whether such
purchase of goods is for resale or for any commercial purpose or for personal use; (ii)
hires or avails of any services for a consideration which has been paid or
promised or partly paid and partly promised, or under any system of deferred
payment and includes any beneficiary of such services other than the person who
hires or avails o the services for consideration paid or promised, or partly paid
and partly promised, or under any system of deferred payment, when such
services are availed of with the approval of the first-mentioned person whether
such hiring or availing of services i for any commercial purpose or for personal
use; (g) "Director General" means the Director General appointed under
Anti-competitive agreements.
3. Anti-competitive agreements.-(1) No enterprise or association of enterprises or
person or association of persons shall enter into any agreement in respect of
production, supply, distribution, storage, acquisition or control of goods or provision
of ervices, which causes or is likely to cause an appreciable adverse effect on
competition within India.
(2) Any agreement entered into in contravention of the provisions contained in subsection
(1) shall be void.
Abuse of dominant position.
4. Abuse of dominant position.-(1) No enterprise shall abuse its dominant position.
(2) There shall be an abuse of dominant position under sub-section
3
(1), if an enterprise,- (a) directly or indirectly, imposes unfair or discriminatory-
(i) condition in purchase or sale of goods or service; or (ii) price in purchase or sale
(including predatory price) of goods or service. Explanation.-For the purposes of this
clause, the unfair or discriminatory condition in purchase or sale of goods or service
referred to in sub-clause (i) and unfair or discriminatory price in purchase or sale of
goods (including predatory price) or serv ce referred to in sub-clause (ii) shall not
include such discriminatory condition or price which may be adopted to meet the
competition; or (b) limits or restricts- (i) production of goods or provision of services
or market therefore; or (ii) technical or scientific development relating to goods or
services to the prejudice of consumers; or (c) indulges in practice or practices
resulting in denial of market access; or (d) makes conclusion of contracts subject to
acceptance by other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature
or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such
contracts; or (e) uses its dominant position in one relevant market to enter into,
or protect, other relevant market. Explanation.-For the purposes of this section,
the expression- (a) "dominant position" means a position of strength, enjoyed by
an enterprise, in the relevant market, in India, which enables it to- (i) operate
independently of competitive forces prevailing in the relevant market; or (ii) affect its
competitors or consumers or the relevant market in its favour; (b) "predatory price"
means the sale of goods or provision of services, at a price which is below the cost, as
may be determined by regulations, of production of the goods or provision of
services, with a view to reduce competition or eliminate the competitors. Regulation
of combinations
Duties of Commission. 18. Duties of Commission.-Subject to the provisions of this
Act, it shall be the duty of the Commission to eliminate practices having adverse
effect on competition, promote and sustain competition, protect the interests of
consumers and ensure freedom of trade carried on by other participants, in markets in
India: Provided that the Commission may, for the purpose of discharging its duties or
performing its functions under this Act, enter into any memorandum or arrangement
with the prior approval of the Central Government, with any agency of any foreign
country.
Inquiry into certain agreements and dominant position of enterprise. 19. Inquiry into
certain agreements and dominant position of
Enterprise.-(1) The Commission may inquire into any alleged
Contravention of the provisions contained in sub-section (1) of
section 3 or sub-section (1) of section 4 either on its own motion or on- (a) receipt
of a complaint, accompanied by such fee as may be determined by regulations, from
any person, consumer or their association or trade association; or (b) a reference
made to it by the Central Government or a State Government or a statutory
authority.
Vide section 66(3) All cases pertaining to monopolistic trade practices or
restrictive trade practices pending before the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade
Practices Commission on or before the commencement of this Act, including
such cases, in which any unfair trade pr ctice has also been alleged, shall, on such
4
commencement, stand transferred to the Competition Commission of India and
shall be adjudicated by that Commission in accordance with the provisions of the
repealed Act as if that Act had not been repealed.
Under Section 66(8) All investigations or proceedings relating to unfair trade
practices referred to in clause (x) of sub-section (1) of section 36A of the Monopolies
and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (54 of 1969), and pending before the
Director General of Investigation and Registration on or before the commencement of
this Act shall, on such commencement, stand transferred to the Competition
Commission of India and the Competition Commission of India may conduct or order
for conduct of such investigation in the manner as it deems fit.
Competetion Act to have overriding effect.under section 60.
Act to have overriding effect.-The provisions of this Act shall have effect
notwithstanding anything inconsistent therewith contained in any other law for
the time being in force.
Provisions pertaining to the of the repealed MRTPC ACT 1969 are also being
reproduced below :
4. APPLICATION OF OTHER LAWS NOT BARRED.
(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2) or elsewhere in this Act, the
provisions of this Act shall be in addition to, and not in derogation of, any other
law for the time being in force.
(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in section 3 or elsewhere in this
Act, so much of the provisions of this Act, as relate to matters in respect
of which specific provisions exist in the -
(i) Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 (2 of 1934), or the Banking Regulation Act,
1949 (10 of 1949), or
(ii) State Bank of India Act, 1955 (23 of 1955), or the State Bank of India
(Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 (38 of 1959), or
(iii) Insurance Act, 1938 (4 of 1938),
shall not apply to a banking company, the State Bank of India or a subsidiary
bank, as defined in the State Bank of India (Subsidiary Banks) Act, 1959 (38 of
1959), or an insurer, as the case may be.
SECTION 2(a) "agreement"
includes any arrangement or understanding, whether or not it is intended that
such agreement shall be enforceable (apart from any provision of this Act) by
legal proceedings;
SECTION 2(d) "dominant undertaking" means -
(iii) an undertaking which, by itself or along with inter-connected undertakings
produces, supplies, distributes or otherwise controls not less than one-fourth of
the total goods that are produced, supplied or distributed in India or any
5
substantial part thereof; or
(iv) an undertaking which provides or otherwise controls not less than one-fourth
of any services that are rendered in India or any substantial part thereof.
SECTION 2(r) "service" means service which is made available to
potential users and includes the provision of facilities in connection with
banking, financing, insurance, chit fund, real estate, transport,
processing, supply of electrical or other energy, boarding or lodging or
both, entertainment, amusement or the purveying of news or other
information, but does not include the rendering of any service free of
charge or under a contract of personal service.
SECTION 2(i) "monopolistic trade practice" means a trade practice which
has, or is likely to have, effect of, -
(i) maintaining the prices of goods or charges for the services at an unreasonable
level by limiting, reducing or otherwise controlling the production, supply or
distribution of goods or the supply of any services or in any other manner.
(ii) unreasonably preventing or lessening competition in the production,
supply or distribution of any goods or in the supply of any services,
(iii) limiting technical development or capital investment to the common
detriment or allowing the quality of any goods produced, supplied or distributed,
or any services rendered, in India to deteriorate;
(iv) increasing unreasonably, -
(a) the cost of production of any goods; or
(b) charges for the provision, or maintenance, of any services;
(v) increasing unreasonably, -
(a) the prices at which goods are, or may be, sold or re-sold, or the charges at
which the services are, or may be, provided; or
(b) the profits which are, or may be, derived by the production, supply or
distribution (including the sale or purchase) of any goods or by the provision of
any services;
(vi) preventing or lessening competition in the production, supply or
distribution of any goods or in the provision or maintenance of any
services by the adoption of unfair methods or unfair or deceptive
practices;
Now I am enclosing the support for financial datas obtained from authorized
sources[ RBI ] to prove the dominance of the two major private banks in India under
the category/classification of banks as other scheduled banks of India , which are
operating the old age shaukari system in the personal finance either only due to
laxity of existing regulatory system or the flaws in the existing regulatory measures .
As a result of which there is huge numbers of complaints are lying and increasing day
by day at various levels i.e. Ombudsmans , National /state/districts consumer forums ,
website of consumers NGOs and civil courts in India .
6
Summary of enclosed data is being reproduced for your quick reference and
very wide financial ramification on the pockets of innocent and unawared
consumers of India . As per recent developments at various levels including the
Hon’ble CCI , RBI and Finance Minister and directions given to IBA and
bankers are in very much in abeyance due to the present regulatory system ay
multi level . Really it requires a co-ordinated approach in suitable manner with
formation of joint committee of all the regulators at one platform.
I am ready to give draft system to give above real affect and to get the country
consumer from such type of prevailing shaukari system by these two dominating
banks .
DATA OF OTHER SCHEDULED BANKS AND TWO DOMINATING BANKS
USING UNFAIR TRADE PRATICE AS A HIDDEN CARTEL AS ON
MARCH 2008
Figures in Crores .
TOTAL CREDIT Credit outstanding PERCENTAGE Remarks
By all banks 379379 100%
BY ICICI BANK 225616 59.46%
BY HDFC BANK 63427 16.72%
TOTAL BY TWO
DOMINATING
BANKS
289043 76.19%
Further under mentioned table prepared from RBI data is quite indicative and evident
fro the discriminatory prevalent interest regime in the country particularly in personal
finance sector managed by these two leading private sector banks. All thus resulted in
the basic concept of nationalization of banking sector . Now there is again need of it
to meet the needs of ignorant people of the country.
RS. IN LACS
Total
personal
finance/credit
by other
SCHEDULE
D BANKS as
on March
2008
DIFFEREN
T
INERESTS
RATES
SLABSS
CONSUMER
DURABLES
HOUSING OTHER
PERSONAL
LOANS
36537236
[7375489]
233397
[62712]
22959925
[30 ,95. 772]
13343914
[40,17,005]
110547
[26202]
Less then
6%
nil 102924
[23032]
7623
[3170]
7909992
[1414353]
6% to
below 10%
35
[1]
6931527
1079028]
9784
[335324]
12471149
[1842556]
10% to
below 12
1478
[6]
11221969
[1427774]
1247702
[414776]
7
4736985
[941799]
12% to less
then 13%
11760
[4408]
278815
[379043]
1937109
[558348]
3003695
[550804]
13% to less
than 14 %
9982
[3107]
1270043
[120013]
1723670
[427684]
1468041
[363062]
14% TO
BELOW
15%
17107
[5087]
374715
[42377]
1076219
[315598]
4621771
[1342328]
15% to
below 16 %
55840
[16642]
180173
[14863]
4385758
[1311003]
390112
[109055]
16% to
below 17%
12117
[2270]
47344
[3387]
330651
[103398]
763788
[172869]
17% to
below 18%
21507
[4560]
33844
[2866]
708437
[165443]
552547
[200278]
18% to
below 20%
85374
[20927]
[
3915
[1489]
463258
[177862]
508610
[412183]
20% and
above
18197
[5588]
5356
[1900]
485057
[404399]
NOTES :FIGURES IN BRAKETS SHOWS NOS OF USERs IN THE
COUNTRY
As per recent annual report of the RBI Ombudsman these two bankers have
maximum complainants which are quite indicative that there is wide unrest
among the banking consumer class of the country.
ABOVE DATA OF TWO DOMINATING BANKS USING UNFAIR TRADE
PRATICE AS A HIDDEN CARTEL AS ON MARCH 2008 IS RBI
PUBLISHED DATA PROVING DOMINANCE UNDER THE
CLASIFICATION SPECIFIED BY THE RBI AS OTHER SCHEDULED
BANKS .
To be in brief I am to say that CCI should take up these delayed issues on top
priority by imposing a heavy penalty on these banks to create financial corpus to
meet the expenses of CCI to get it investigated and forming the high powered
committee and give me chance to prove further evidences in the next proceeding
of the CCI.
With best regards,
Yours faithfully,
SHIV KUMAR GUPTA
HOUSE NO -154-F, NEAR BUS STAND
GHANDHI DHAM
JAGADHRI-135003.
mobile no 09810467564
ENCLSED AS ABOBE
8