Delhi HC upholds CCI decision of Vistara-Air India merger


The Delhi High Court has rejected a petition against the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) approval of the merger of Tata SIA Airlines, operating as Vistara, with Air India. The petition was filed by Captain Deepak Kumar, a former Air India pilot, who alleged cartelisation and bid rigging in the merger. However, the antitrust watchdog had dismissed his plea in December, citing the absence of substantive evidence.

Kumar then moved the High Court, alleging that the Commission passed the order without conducting any inquiry. Justice Sanjeev Narula, while upholding the CCI?s order, noted that Kumar's plea contained numerous unsubstantiated and reckless allegations not supported by evidence and appeared to be driven by malice.

"The claims are made without any regard for truth and appear to be designed to manipulate or mislead. This approach not only discredits the Petitioner?s credibility but also burdens the legal system unnecessarily. Therefore, in the court?s view, given the absence of any substantiated claims and the apparent malicious intent behind the allegations, the present petition lacks merit,? the court stated.

The High Court also observed that Kumar's petition included "numerous unsubstantiated, wild, and scandalous allegations against the Prime Minister and a former Chief Justice of India," none of which were supported by documentary evidence.

In November 2022, the Tata Group and Singapore Airlines announced their plan to merge Vistara into Air India, which would give the Tata Group at least a 51% stake in the merged entity. Singapore Airlines would hold a minority stake of 25.1%. (Source: ET)

Related Stories

Delhi HC restrains share transfer in Oberoi Hotels amid dispute

The court also safeguarded Anastasia and her mother's possessions.

Delhi HC overturns Punjab & Sind Bank's Rs 1.2 billion OTS withdrawal

HC said that once money is taken, the OTS is binding and cannot be unilaterally revoked.

Delhi HC rejects PIL for demolishing alleged illegal construction

Plea had been filed without adequate preparation.