After pursuing a competition law challenge for nearly seven years, Meru Travel Solutions has brought its legal fight against Ola and Uber to an end, telling the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) that it no longer has the resources to continue the proceedings.
The appeal, which stemmed from allegations of predatory pricing and anti-competitive conduct by the two ride-hailing giants, was withdrawn without any conditions. A Bench comprising Justice Yogesh Khanna and technical member Ajai Das Mehrotra permitted the withdrawal after Meru informed the tribunal that prolonged financial difficulties had made it impossible to pursue the litigation further.
The tribunal noted that Meru has been grappling with severe operational and revenue challenges for an extended period, leaving the company unable to sustain the appeal. It recorded that the management had decided to discontinue the proceedings as continuing the case was no longer commercially viable.
Ola and Uber did not object to the request, following which the NCLAT allowed the appeal to be withdrawn.
The dispute traces back to a June 20, 2018 order of the Competition Commission of India (CCI), which had dismissed four complaints filed by Meru against Ola, Uber India Systems, Uber BV and Uber Technologies Inc. The complaints alleged violations of Sections 3 and 4 of the Competition Act, 2002.
Meru had approached the CCI in 2017, accusing the companies of engaging in anti-competitive practices in the radio taxi markets across Hyderabad, Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai.
According to Meru, the rival platforms relied on their financial strength to offer substantial incentives to drivers and steep discounts to passengers, creating barriers for competitors and making it difficult for other operators to survive. The company argued that the incentive programmes were designed to lock drivers into their respective platforms rather than being driven by legitimate business considerations.
Meru further alleged that Ola and Uber had collectively spent nearly ₹13,000 crore on driver incentives in India and had been offering rides below variable cost for over two years in an effort to eliminate competition from the market.
The CCI, however, found no prima facie evidence to support the allegations. It observed that incentives offered to drivers did not automatically amount to anti-competitive agreements, particularly because both drivers and passengers had the flexibility to use multiple ride-hailing platforms and switch between them.
Challenging that decision, Meru had moved the NCLAT. With the appeal now withdrawn, the CCI’s 2018 order closing the complaints will remain in force, effectively bringing the long-running dispute to a close.
