Delhi HC refuses to hear Google’s appeal against single-judge’s order directing CCI to decide applications of startups against new app billing policy
Today, before Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma led bench, Google's counsel Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi had mentioned the appeal.
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday refused to urgently list an appeal filed by Google against single-judge 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 and to dispose of the same on or before April 26.
Today, Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi appearing for Google mentioned the appeal and requested for urgent listing before a division bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Subramonium Prasad.
The senior counsel 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) stated that the meeting is fixed for today at 2:30 pm and it is to be disposed of by tomorrow i.e. April 26 as per the single-judge order.
Taking note of the submissions, the bench 'refused' to hear Google’s appeal.
Notably, the bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela had yesterday 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 and to dispose of the same on or before April 26.
“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 ordered.
The court had passed the orders on a plea 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.