Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Submit Guest Post

Plea against nod to Flipkart's acquisition by Walmart rejected

AN Indian tribunal on Thursday (12) dismissed a petition filed by the country’s traders' body CAIT against CCI nod to Walmart's $16billion acquisition of Flipkart.

A two-member bench of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) headed by Justice S J Mukhopadhaya said CAIT failed to establish its allegations against CCI granting approval for Walmart-Flipkart deal.


NCLAT also said Flipkart was not even made party by CAIT in its plea. "We find no merit in it, accordingly the appeal is dismissed," said NCLAT, upholding the CCI nod to the deal.

The appellate tribunal also observed that the deal would add value to the e-commerce company based in the southern Indian city of Bengaluru.

The Competition Commission of India (CCI) on August 8, 2018 had said it has approved US retail giant Walmart's acquisition of Flipkart.

NCLAT had reserved its order on CAIT's plea in January last year.

In August 2018, CAIT had filed a petition in NCLAT asking for  reversal of the Walmart-Flipkart deal. Orders passed by CCI can be challenged before NCLAT.

On August 18, 2018, Walmart announced that it has completed a deal with Flipkart and holds a 77 per cent stake in the Indian e-commerce major. The deal size was $16bn.

In the following month, NCLAT asked Walmart International Holdings Inc to file a reply before it explaining the way of doing business in India.

CAIT was also asked to file its understanding over Walmart's business model in India.

In its petition, CAIT mentioned that CCI in its order has ignored the predatory activities carried out by both Flipkart and Walmart in the past.

Add EasternEye As Your Trusted Source
preferred source on google news

More For You

Goldman Sachs

The tribunal found flaws in Goldman Sachs' handling of a senior executive's redundancy while he was on paternity leave

Getty Images

Goldman Sachs faces £1.45m blow over paternity leave dismissal

  • Goldman Sachs has been ordered to pay a former executive £1.45 million over his dismissal while on paternity leave.
  • The tribunal found the bank failed to follow a fair redundancy process, although it said there was a 50 per cent chance he would have lost his job anyway.
  • Goldman Sachs says it strongly disagrees with the ruling and intends to challenge the decision.

Goldman Sachs has been ordered to pay a former senior executive £1.45 million after an employment tribunal found serious flaws in the way the investment bank handled his redundancy while he was on paternity leave.

The Goldman Sachs paternity leave case centres on Jonathan Reeves, the bank's former deputy global head of the compliance "control room" in London. Reeves argued that he was unfairly dismissed and discriminated against after being selected for redundancy while taking six months of parental leave to care for his newborn child.

Keep ReadingShow less