Spread the love

This article is written by Gouri CV of 6th Semester of BA LLB of Kerala law Academy Law College, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala, an intern under Legal Vidhiya


India’s regulatory framework for mergers and acquisitions has evolved significantly over the years, catering to the dynamic landscape of corporate transactions. The article delved into the comprehensive provisions outlined in the Companies Act, encompassing both standard procedures and expedited mechanisms to facilitate M&A activities. Furthermore, it highlighted the regulatory oversight provided by SEBI, ensuring transparency and fairness in the process, along with the significant considerations under the Competition Act to prevent monopolistic practices and promote healthy competition. Together, these regulations form a robust framework aimed at balancing the interests of all stakeholders involved in mergers and acquisitions, fostering a conducive environment for sustainable corporate growth and development in India.


Mergers, Acquisition, Stakeholder, Board of Directors, NCLT, Company, Regulation, Legal framework


In the fast-paced world of business, mergers and acquisitions (M&A) have become indispensable tools for companies aiming to expand their market presence, streamline operations, or diversify their portfolios. In India, a burgeoning economy brimming with entrepreneurial zeal, the regulatory framework governing M&A activities plays a pivotal role in shaping the landscape of corporate transactions.

The Indian company law, a comprehensive set of regulations and statutes, provides the foundational framework within which mergers, acquisitions, and other restructuring activities are conducted. Over the years, this regulatory framework has evolved in response to dynamic market conditions, emerging global trends, and the need to strike a delicate balance between facilitating business growth and safeguarding stakeholders’ interests.

This article delves into the intricacies of the regulatory framework governing mergers and acquisitions in Indian company law. From the initial stages of due diligence to the final approval by regulatory authorities, each step in the M&A process is meticulously scrutinized and regulated to ensure transparency, fairness, and legal compliance.

Through a comprehensive analysis, we will explore the key provisions of Indian company law that govern M&A transactions, including the Companies Act, Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) regulations, and guidelines issued by regulatory bodies such as the Competition Commission of India (CCI).

Furthermore, we will examine recent developments, legislative amendments, and landmark judicial decisions that have shaped the regulatory landscape of M&A in India. By understanding the evolving regulatory framework, stakeholders can navigate the complexities of M&A transactions with confidence, ensuring compliance with legal requirements while maximizing value for all parties involved.

In a rapidly globalizing economy, where mergers and acquisitions serve as catalysts for growth and innovation, a nuanced understanding of the regulatory framework is indispensable for businesses, investors, legal practitioners, and policymakers alike. This article aims to provide a comprehensive overview of the regulatory landscape surrounding M&A activities in India, shedding light on both the opportunities and challenges inherent in navigating this dynamic terrain.


Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) essentially indicates an amalgamation of companies or financial entities. [1]  The term ‘merger’ is not defined under any statute. A merger takes place when two or more companies merge to form one company. One company survives, while the other loses its corporate existence. The assets, liabilities and stick are transferred to the surviving company.[2] Both Merger and Acquisition are terms denoting amalgamation of entities where the former calls for a formation of new entity while the latter is limited to purchase of one by another. During a merger, both companies’ boards of directors approve the decision, and subsequently, they seek approval from their respective shareholders. However, acquisition is a strategic acquiring of majority stake in a company without changing its name of organizational structure. [3]

There are different types of Mergers. Two companies who are the direct competitors in the same market with similar product merges, it is called Horizontal merger. Vertical merger is where two companies in different stages of supply chain of the same product in the same industry merges with one another. Congeneric mergers are mergers of companies that serve the same consumer base in different ways. In order to expand the market of a product to another territory companies often choose for market-extension merger. When two companies of different but related products enters into a merger in the same market it is called product extension merger. Conglomerate mergers involve the fusion of two or more companies operating in disparate industries or markets.[4] The objective is to form a larger entity with a diversified business portfolio, thereby mitigating risks by spreading them across various sectors and lessening reliance on any single market or product.

Mergers and acquisitions (M&A) encompass various integration approaches, each tailored to achieve specific strategic goals and organizational synergies. Statutory integration usually takes place when the assets and liabilities of target company is smaller than the acquirer. The smaller company ceases to exist after the deal. But in subsidiary merger the target company only becomes a subsidiary of the acquirer and continues to run its business. However, in consolidation, both companies cease to exist and a new entity is formed. [5]

Acquisition is usually done in three common modes. Acquisition of the assets and liabilities of the company or the business as a going concern for a lump sum amount without assigning any value to individual assets and liabilities are called Slump Sale.[6] Asset transfer is where an acquirer chooses to cherry pick the assets and liabilities of a company leaving behind certain assets and liabilities in the transferor entity[7]. Acquisition of shares of a company from an existing shareholder or by subscribing to the fresh shares of a company are called share acquisition.

The significant motive behind M&A involves value maximisation, reduction of competitors, invention of industry or to create synergies of scale.[8] Due diligence, negotiation and integration are the phases of M&A transactions.[9] Creation of synergies where the combined company is worth more than the two companies individually is the common rationale for M&A.[10] Moreover the growth of companies through M&A, though inorganically, is a comparatively faster way. This facilitates access to latest capabilities without risking internal development. Horizontal and vertical mergers give the parties a higher control over the market and supply chain thereby making them resistant to external shocks. Cyclical industries often opt for diversification to avoid significant loss during slowdown phase in their industry. M&A is a much-preferred option in that context.[11] The acquirer company also lowers its tax liability by acquiring a company with tax losses.


Neo-economic environment of first half of 1990s embarked significant transformations in the M&A policy of India. With the LPG policy it has become imperative for the government to remove the restrictions that hampered expansion, diversification and upgradation of technology required for international competitiveness and therefore decided to remove the restrictive provisions of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices (MRTP) Act, 1969 relating to licensing for expansion, amalgamation and takeovers of business enterprises.[12] Previously, any company or any firm was forced to undergo a pressurized and hectic procedure to get approval for Mergers and Acquisitions for performing the required action.  In 1993, Foreign Exchange Regulation Act was amended to permit Indian nationals and companies to start joint ventures abroad and accept directorships in overseas companies. All restrictions with respect to borrowing, raising deposits, holding stakes etc in India were removed.[13] Private mutual funds and foreign institutional investors were allowed to enter the capital market.

In 1988, India’s corporate landscape witnessed a significant event in the form of a prominent business acquisition or merger. Swaraj Paul, representing Escorts Ltd, executed a notable takeover of DCM Ltd, marking one of the most memorable and controversial hostile takeover attempts in the country’s history. [14]  This event spurred a wave of interest among Non-Resident Indians (NRIs), leading to an influx of similar acquisitions as they sought to diversify their stock exchange portfolios by acquiring various companies.[15] In 1998, a significant milestone was achieved in the realm of Indian mergers and acquisitions as the first successful acquisition of an Indian target by a predator occurred through the hostile takeover route.[16]

Foreign Exchange Management Act, 2000 removed the profitability condition and allowed companies to invest all the proceeds of their global depository receipts for acquisition of foreign companies and direct investment in joint ventures.[17] The new policy shift in 2005 exceeded the permissibly percentage of foreign investment to 200% of their net worth without any exchange earning condition.[18] The competition Policy Act, 2000 set up Competition Commission of India(CCI) to check the abuse of market dominance. Combinations that are anti-competitive in nature and detrimental to consumer’s interest will be checked by the commission. All M&A with joint turnover above 3000/- crore or with combined value of assets more than 1000 crore are referred to CCI.[19]

In fact, a series of high-profile transactions have heralded the arrival of booming M&A activity in India. In this regard, Vodafone’s $11.1 billion acquisition deal with Hutchison Essar is relevant to be noted.[20] The $13.2 billion dollar Tata-Corus deal[21] and the $11 billion Airtel-Zain deal also proffer fitting examples to this effect.[22] India’s corporate landscape has indeed seen substantial progress with multimillion-dollar negotiations of amicable deals. However, hostile takeover endeavours have largely remained inactive. Numerous instances illustrate how most attempts at hostile takeovers in India have been effectively countered and prevented.[23] While the M&A activity in India was largely resilient during the period 2015-2019, India witnessed a surge with deal values in 2022 where strategic M&A deal volume and value reached an unprecedented peak in India, while the rest of the world faced a drop.[24] Mergers and acquisitions activity in India experienced significant growth with over 20 large transactions, reaching a record high of USD 107 billion, nearly double the amount recorded in 2021.[25]


Section 230 to 240 of Companies Act, 1956 along with a handful of legislations including Income Tax Act, 1961, SEBI Act,1992, Competition Act,2002 and associated rules and regulations are the existing legal framework that broadly deals with M&A in India. All M&A must be in compliance with Companies Act and Securities and Exchange Board of India’s Regulations.[26] In the following session, role of each enactment in shaping framework of M&A in India is assessed.

Procedure in Companies Act, 1956

Mergers, acquisitions, and combinations are intricate business transactions necessitating meticulous planning, execution, and assessment. Section 230 to 232 of the Companies Act, 2013 along with Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 are the primary legislations dealing with the Mergers and Amalgamation of the Companies.

It is crucial to verify that companies involved in a merger have the authority outlined in their Memorandum of Association to undergo such an amalgamation. If the power for amalgamation is not expressly stated in the object clause, the companies must amend their Memorandum of Association to include it before proceeding with the merger. A draft scheme of amalgamation must receive approval in a board meeting of the respective companies involved. The resolution passed during this board meeting is then to be filed with the registrar of companies using Form MGT 14.[27] An application for amalgamation with the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) must be submitted using Form No. NCLT-1, accompanied by the required documents such as a Notice of Admission (Form No. NCLT-2), an Affidavit (Form No. NCLT-6), a copy of the Scheme of Amalgamation, and prescribed fees. Additionally, the application must disclose the basis on which each class of members or creditors has been identified for scheme approval. For NCLT-directed meetings, notices must be sent to creditors, members, and debenture holders using Form No. CAA.2, accompanied by the amalgamation scheme details.[28] The chairperson or designated individual must file an affidavit to NCLT, confirming notice compliance. Notices can be sent via various modes, including registered post, email, or hand delivery, at least one month before the meeting date. Documents must also be published on the company website and in newspapers. Separate meetings may have a joint advertisement. NCLT may waive creditor meetings if 90% agree via affidavit. If not, a meeting is held, and approval requires 3/4th majority of creditors or members. The scheme requires approval by a majority representing 3/4th in value of creditors, members, or their respective classes, either in person, by proxy, or via postal ballot.[29] Voting occurs through poll or electronic means at the meeting. If 3/4th of creditors and members consent, as per NCLT’s order, the scheme becomes binding for the company, creditors, and members. Notice in Form No. CAA.3, along with the amalgamation scheme, is sent to Central Government, Registrar of Companies, Income-tax authorities, and other regulators as required. Authorities must receive it promptly via registered post, speed post, courier, or hand delivery after members or creditors. They have thirty days to make representations to NCLT. If none, it’s assumed they have no objections to the scheme. The chairperson must submit a report to NCLT, within the specified timeframe or within 3 days after the meeting, using Form No. CAA.4. The report should accurately detail the meeting’s outcomes, including the number of present creditors and members, voting methods used (in person, by proxy, or electronically), and individual values of votes.[30] Once the proposed amalgamation is approved by members or creditors, the company must file a petition (Form No.CAA.5) with NCLT within seven days. Failure to do so allows creditors or members, with NCLT’s leave, to file the petition at the company’s expense. NCLT sets a hearing date advertised in newspapers and serves notice to objectors, government, and other relevant authorities. The order, if sanctioning amalgamation, includes directions or modifications for its implementation (Form No. CAA.7). The company must file a certified copy of the order with the Registrar within thirty days. A certificate from the company’s auditor confirming conformity with accounting standards is required for NCLT’s sanction.[31] The NCLT’s order must be filed with the Registrar using Form INC-28 within thirty days of receipt. The Companies Act, 2013 facilitates mergers and amalgamations with time-bound processes, enhanced disclosures, and simplified procedures, ensuring efficient regulatory clearances. [32] If multiple companies are involved in the scheme, they may choose to file a joint application before the NCLT. However, if the registered offices of the companies are in different states, separate petitions will be required as different Tribunals will have jurisdiction over them.

The procedures associated with mergers, acquisitions, and combinations can be intricate and time-consuming, underscoring the necessity of experienced professionals to navigate the process effectively. To address this issue a fast-track merger route is also made available for certain types of companies: (1) Two or more small companies (2) A holding company and its wholly-owned subsidiary company (3) Two or more start-up companies (4) One or more start-up companies with one or more small companies.[33] To initiate the fast-track process, the company must send a notice of the proposed merger or amalgamation to the Registrar and Official Liquidators using Form No. CAA-9, inviting suggestions and objections. Furthermore, the companies must file a declaration of solvency with the registrar in Form No. CAA-10. Approval of the scheme requires consent from members holding at least 90% of the total shares and a majority of creditors holding 9/10th of the value of creditors.[34] Once approved, the transferee company submits the scheme to the Central Government in Form No. CAA-11, along with filing it with the registrar in Form No. GNL-1 and delivering a copy to the official liquidator. If objections arise from the registrar or official liquidator, they are forwarded to the Central Government for consideration. If the Central Government deems the scheme not in the public interest, it may file objections with the tribunal. The tribunal can either direct to consider the scheme as per the normal merger process outlined in Section 232 or confirm the merger through the fast-track route. Once the tribunal confirms the scheme, the order is communicated to the registrar of the transferee company, who issues a confirmation forwarded to the registrar of the transferor company.[35]

Section 234 of the Companies Act, 2013 read with rule 25A of Companies (Compromises, Arrangements and Amalgamations) Rules, 2016 permits mergers and amalgamations between companies registered under this Act and companies incorporated in countries specified by the Central Government. Additionally, it allows for mergers between a foreign company, defined as any company or body corporate incorporated outside India, and a company registered under this Act, subject to prior approval from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). For a cross-border merger to take place, certain conditions must be met: (1) The foreign company must be incorporated in a jurisdiction that is approved and meets specific criteria. (2) The transferee company must ensure that the valuation is conducted by a recognized professional body within its jurisdiction and adheres to internationally accepted accounting and valuation principles. (3) The merger process outlined in the Companies Act, 2013 must be followed.[36] Moreover, RBI introduced the Foreign Exchange Management (Cross Border Merger) Regulations, 2018 according to which, any transaction related to a cross-border merger conducted in compliance with the FEMA Regulations will be considered approved by the RBI.

SEBI Regulations

The Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992, and its associated regulations oversee the securities markets in India, including acquisitions involving listed companies on stock exchanges. The SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 2011, commonly referred to as the Takeover Code, oversee the acquisition of shares, voting rights, and control in listed companies. It was issued to ensure fairness to all shareholders by mandating transparency in acquisition and takeovers. This provision is designed to encourage innovation and growth by providing a more streamlined regulatory approach, allowing for a more entrepreneurial ecosystem to thrive. Under the Takeover Code, Regulation2(1)(a) provides a comprehensive definition of an acquirer. An acquirer is defined as any individual, whether acting independently or in collaboration with others, who directly or indirectly obtains or enters into an agreement to obtain shares, voting rights, or control over a listed company. [37]Future agreements or intents, where an individual or entity explicitly agrees to acquire shares of a Listed company is considered as acquisition. That is, even potential-market moving decisions are under regulatory oversight.

 An acquirer is not permitted to acquire shares solely based on their financial capability or personal desire. The acquisition process is governed by specific requirements and disclosure protocols, aiming to prevent the acquirer from blindsiding other shareholders or unfairly altering the balance of power within the company. It sets out specific thresholds and circumstances under which an acquirer must publicly announce an open offer to acquire shares of a listed company.[38] These regulations are designed to guarantee that minority shareholders have a fair chance to participate in significant acquisitions and takeovers. No person, whether a promoter, acquirer, or someone working together with them, can buy or agree to buy shares or voting rights that would push their total ownership above 75% of all shares in a listed company. This means at least 25% of the company’s shares must be held by shareholders who aren’t promoters. This regulation primarily aims to protect the interests of minority shareholders.[39] It does so by imposing restrictions on significant acquisitions and takeovers, thereby preventing the marginalization or compromise of minority shareholders’ interests.

In December 2021, SEBI amended the Takeover Regulations, setting the delisting threshold at 90 percent and streamlining the delisting process to prioritize investor interests. The SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015, establish guidelines for listed securities, including conditions for seeking approval from the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) for merger, amalgamation, or reconstruction schemes. The SEBI (Prohibition of Insider Trading) Regulations, 2015, regulate information flow regarding the target company and insider trading activities. For acquisitions potentially leading to delisting, the SEBI (Delisting of Equity Shares) Regulations, 2009, apply, outlining the procedures and requirements for delisting a listed company’s shares.[40]

Competition Act, 2002

Competition Act, 2002 contains provisions to avoid potential violations and legal consequences in M&A. Firstly the market shares, competitive position and conduct of parties involved in transaction are evaluated to assess potential competition law risks. Ongoing or potential antitrust investigations or litigations are also identified. This stage is named as Pre-transaction due diligence phase.[41] Afterwards if the transaction meets the mandatory notification requirements under the competition act, parties must submit the necessary information to CCI. The transaction must not include any coordination of competitive behaviour, price fixing, bid rigging, market allocation or any other anti-competitive behaviour.[42] If one party holds a dominant position in the market, the CCI has to consider the potential impact of the M&A on market competition. The parties can propose suitable remedies or commitments including divestitures, licensing arrangements etc. in case where potential anti-competitive effects are identified. Parties have to cooperate with CCI throughout the review process and provide them with necessary information. Even after the completion of M&A the parties should continue to comply with competition law obligations.[43]

In the famous case of Competition Commission of India v. Bharati Airtel & Ors[44] the hon’ble apex court clearly defined the jurisdiction of CCI. The Supreme Court has clarified that the Competition Commission of India (CCI) holds the authority to decide matters concerning anti-competitive agreements, abuse of dominant position, and combinations. This responsibility sets CCI apart from bodies like TRAI. CCI’s role includes investigating if service providers colluded or formed cartels to hinder the entry of RJIL into the market, violating Section 3(3)(b) of the Competition Act. It is tasked with determining if there was an anti-competitive agreement, particularly through platforms like COAI, and whether the conduct was unilateral or collective based on an agreement. Further in the recent case of Coal India Ltd and Anr v. CCI and Anr[45] it was held that dominant position means a position of strength enjoyed by the enterprise in the specific market. The test to identify the dominance is to find out the its role in reference to its ability to affect its competitors or consumers.

Upon receiving a complaint or reference or on its own initiative, the CCI can investigate alleged abuses of dominance by an enterprise.[46] If such violations are identified, remedies are imposed to mitigate the harm caused. It includes fine and penalties, structural remedies, behavioural remedies, market access remedies, consumer remedies etc.


In conclusion, the regulatory framework overseeing mergers and acquisitions in India has undergone substantial evolution. Through the collaboration of various statutes and regulations, M&A activities in India are conducted on the ground with meticulous care and diligence. These provisions effectively strike a balance between the rights of the involved parties and the broader interests of the public. As a result, the regulatory environment fosters a fair and transparent landscape for mergers and acquisitions, contributing to the overall growth and stability of India’s corporate sector.

[1] George H. Manne, Mergers and the Market for Corporate Control, 73 J. Polit. Econ. 110-120 (1965).

[2] Stephen Mathias, Law and Practice of takeovers in India- An analysis, 7 Student Adv 55 (1995).


[4] Conglomerate Merger Notes, Notre Dam lawyer 45 Hein Online 698 (1969-70)

[5] Supra 1 at 115

[6] See Wave Industries Pvt Ltd v. State of UP and Ors, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1721.

[7] See Mohan Murti v. Deutsche Ranco GMBH, 2014 AIR CC 8.

[8] Andrade Gregor, Mark Mitchell & Erik Stafford, New Evidence and Perspectives on Mergers, 15 (2) J.E.P. 103-120 (2001).

[9] M. Zollo & H. Singh, Deliberate Learning In Corporate Acquisitions: Post Acquisition Strategies And Integration Capability In US Bank Mergers, 25 (13) Strateg. Manag. J. 1233-1256 (2004).

[10] CORPORATE FINANCE INSTITUTE, https://corporatefinanceinstitute.com/resources/valuation/mergers-acquisitions-ma/ (last visited April 06,2024).

[11] Sealy Albert H, Acqusitions and Mergers, 1 Bussiness Lawyer, 16, 209-236 (1960).

[12] Vikramjeet Reen, An Overview of the Legal Regime Governing mergers and Acqusitions in India, 8 Student Advoc. 142(1996).

[13] Paul Weiden L, Foreign Exchange Restrictions, 16 N.Y.U.L.Q. Rev. 559(1938-1939)

[14] Raees Khan and Tina Vyas, History of Mergers And Acquisitions In India: Past Activities And Future Possibilities, 8, International Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 9, 862 (2018).

[15] Ibid

[16] Pallavi Arora, Evaluating the Prospects of Effectuating A Hostile Takeover in the Indian Corporate Landscape, 4.1 NLIU LR 2 (2014).

[17] Raunak Chaturvedi, F.E.R.A., F.E.M.A., the Companies Act, and Their Impact on the Indian Business Environment, 1.2 JCLJ (2021) 167.

[18] Akash Amati and Namit Bafna, Decoding Foreign Exchange derivatives Regulation in india, 9(1) SCHOLASTICUS 26 (2021)

[19] PL Beena, Trends and Perspectives On Corporate Merger In Contemporary India, 43 Economic and Political Weekly, 39, 48-56 (2008).

[20] Phineas Lambert, Vodafone: Hutchison Essar on Track to Close, Dailydeal (April 06, 2024) http://www.thedeal.com

[21] Jonathan Braude, Tata Wins Corus Auction, Dailydeal (Apr 06,2024) http://www.thedeal.com

[22] The Reporter, BhartiZain to sign $10.7 billion deal within days, The Economic Times (Apr 06,2024) http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/news-by-industry/telecom/bharti-zain-to-sign-10-1-bn-deal-within-days/articleshow/5122231.cms

[23] Supra 9 at 1242

[24]Karan Singh and Vikram Chandrashekhar, M&A in India: How Long Can This Hotspot Buck the Global Downturn? BAIN & COMPANY (Apr 07,2024 09:24 AM), https://www.bain.com/insights/india-m-and-a-report-2023/

[25]Deals in India: Annual Review 2022, PwC India (Apr 07,2024) https://www.pwc.in/assets/pdfs/services/deals/deals-in-india-annual-review-2022.pdf


[27] Enakshi Jha and Shantanu Dey, Related Party Transactions under the Companies Act 2013: Taking a Step Forward in an Adapting Regulatory Environment, (2014) 1.8 JCLG 1026.

[28] Tanvi Singh, Key Highlights of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 2020, 2021 SCC OnLine Blog LME 3.

[29] Suvansh Majumdar, A Disquisition on the Concept of Corporate Governance, 2.1 JCLJ  116 (2021).

[30] Mrunalini Sohania and Ashita Dakeb, Mergers and Acquisition: A Tool to Grow in the Global Market, 2.4 JCLJ  2414 (2022)

[31] Ibid

[32] Nishith Desai Associates, Mergers & Acquisitions- An India Legal, Regulatory and Tax perspective, ( Apr 07, 2024)https://www.nishithdesai.com/fileadmin/user_upload/pdfs/Research_Papers/Mergers___Acquisitions_in_India.pdf

[33] Kalpita Krushnakant Pandit, Legal protection of Corporate Whistleblowers in India, 3.1 JCLJ 2099 (2022).

[34] Ibid

[35] A Switch in Time Saves Nine- Minimizing Corporate Crime by Maximizing Corporate Whistleblowing In India, 3.2 JCLG 70 (2020).

[36] Outbound Mergers- A Distant Dream? Analysing the new Cross Border Merger Framework under the Companies Act, 2013, 3.1 JCLG 164 (2019).

[37] Shweta Gautam and Arya Sharma, Insider Trading: A Reality of Indian security Market, 1.4 JCLJ  1146 (2021).

[38] Regulation 3(3) and 4 of SEBI (SAST) Regulation, 2011

[39] Supra 36 at 164

[40] Pijush Sarmah, The Impact of Mergers and Acquisitions on Business growth and Development, 2.2 JCLJ  307 (2022)

[41] Mahesh. L Chaudhary, Abhishek Wadhawan, Jalaj Pandey and Ved Thakur, Exemption of Public Sector Banks Mergers in India from Competition Act, 2002 : Determining the Rationale, Implications and Issues,11 GJLDP 161 (2021)

[42] Competition Act, 2002, § 20(4), Act No. 12 of 2003, Acts of Parliament (2002).

[43] Yash Rayakwara and Shivani Gaur, Mergers under Competition Act, 2002 : Analysis of Zee & Sony Merger case, 3.1 JCLJ  2191 (2022).

[44] (2019) 2 SCC 521

[45] (2023) 10 SCC 345

[46] Competition Act, 2002, § 19, Act No. 12 of 2003, Acts of Parliament (2002).

Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.


Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *