Delhi HC issues notice on Google’s appeal against single-judge’s order directing CCI to decide applications of Startups against New In-app billing policy

The Delhi High Court on Wednesday 'issued notice' on the appeal filed by Google against a single judge bench order directing the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to decide the applications moved by a bunch of startups through the Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF) challenging Google’s new in-app billing policy.

The single judge bench had ordered the CCI to dispose of the applications on or before April 26.

A division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad today posted the matter for hearing on July 19, 2023.

Notably, yesterday, the division bench had 'refused to urgently list' the appeal filed by Google against the single-judge bench order.

Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi appearing for Google had mentioned the appeal yesterday and said, “The order was passed yesterday. It is scheduled at CCI today at 2:30 pm and the decision has to be taken today. The CCI lacks quorum, that’s the difficulty”.

On the contrary, the counsel for the Competition Commission of India (CCI) had stated that the meeting was fixed for April 25 at 2:30 pm and it was to be disposed of by April 26 as per the single-judge order.

Notably, the bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela had on Monday directed the CCI to decide the applications moved by a bunch of startups through the Alliance of Digital India Foundation (ADIF) challenging Google’s new in-app billing policy.

“There is no impediment, legal or otherwise, in directing the CCI to take up the applications under Section 42 of the Act, as filed by the petitioner, for hearing and considering the same in accordance with law on or before 26.04.2023. Accordingly, the petition stands disposed of in above terms”, the court had then ordered.

The plea before the high court had been moved by Indian start-ups like Paytm, Matrimony, MapmyIndia, and TrulyMadly, through ADIF against Google’s new in-app purchase policy, which is set to be applicable from April 26.

The court had opined that the goals and objectives of a specific enactment should be interpreted in a way that ensures the legislative intent behind such promulgation is carried out to its logical conclusion.

“In other words, merely because of a defect or a vacancy in the constitution of the CCI, the CCI cannot be considered as a statutory authority not having jurisdiction to adjudicate the complaints or other proceedings pending before it. Any interpretation, other than the aforesaid, would render the provisions of Section 15 otiose and which could not possibly be the intention of the Legislature either”, the court had said.