EVOLVING LEGAL INTERPRETATIONS OF INDIA’S COMPETITION ACT IN THE DIGITAL SPACE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS IN SPECIAL REFERENCE TO INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM
AUTHOR – ARGHA BANERJEE, RESEARCH SCHOLAR AT UNIVERSITY OF CALCUTTA
BEST CITATION – ARGHA BANERJEE, EVOLVING LEGAL INTERPRETATIONS OF INDIA’S COMPETITION ACT IN THE DIGITAL SPACE: A CRITICAL ANALYSIS IN SPECIAL REFERENCE TO INDIAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM, INDIAN JOURNAL OF LEGAL REVIEW (IJLR), 6 (9) OF 2026, PG. 940-951, APIS – 3920 – 0001 & ISSN – 2583-2344. DOI – https://doi.org/10.65393/IJLRV6I998
Abstract
The Competition Act, 2002 was introduced to promote fair competition, safeguard consumer interests, and curb anti-competitive practices in India. It replaced the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (MRTP Act), in response to the changing needs of a liberalized and globalized economy. This paper examines the background and evolution of the Act, with special focus on the Raghavan Committee’s recommendations, which played a key role in shaping the legislation. The paper outlines the key objectives and core provisions of the Act, along with its enforcement structure, particularly the role of the Competition Commission of India (CCI). This paper investigates how recent CCI and judicial interpretations of the Competition Act, 2002 are shaping India’s digital and platform economy. Focusing on landmark cases, especially the Google–Android TV settlement (April 2025) and the Zomato–Swiggy investigation (2024–25), it evaluates how enforcement actions on bundling, exclusivity, and predatory pricing apply legal tests under Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. By comparing these developments to U.S. and EU precedents, the paper highlights India’s evolving stance on market leverage and two‑sided platforms, while examining interpretive challenges like market definition, economic complexity, and procedural delays. This paper concludes with recommendations to enhance the Act’s interpretive clarity and to improve the CCI’s agility in regulating India’s digital economy.
Keywords: App‑bundling, Abuse of dominance, Digital Economy.