Indian food ordering and delivery giants Swiggy and Zomato may face an investigation over anti-competitive practices as the local restaurant industry body has filed a complaint against the duo with the market regulator, the Competition Commission of India (CCI).
The National Restaurants Association of India (NRAI), which represents over 50,000 restaurants and eateries in the country, has submitted detailed information on the practices followed by food aggregators that are hurting the industry to the CCI on July 1.
“During the pandemic, the magnitude of anti-competitive practices of Zomato and Swiggy have increased manifold, and despite numerous discussions with them, these well-funded marketplace platforms are not interested in alleviating the concerns of the restaurants. In fact, during the pandemic, due to onerous terms imposed, a lot of our partners had to close shop,” the NRAI said in a statement on Monday.
In its petition to the CCI, the NRAI alleged Swiggy and Zomato charge restaurants “exorbitant commissions” and “mask customer” data from them so that restaurants can’t approach consumers directly. The complaint highlighted the fact that Zomato and Swiggy arm-twist restaurants into providing steep discounts in lieu of maintaining an appropriate listing and that non-participation by them could lower their visibility on the platform.
The NRAI also claimed that the two major online food marketplaces are breaching platform neutrality by favoring their in-house brands, aside from giving restaurants that sign exclusive agreements better benefits. Furthermore, it noted that Swiggy and Zomato sign price parity contracts with restaurants that bar them from offering their food items at lower prices on other platforms.
Want more news? Subscribe to CPI’s free daily newsletter for more headlines and updates on antitrust developments around the world.
Featured News
Electrolux Fined €44.5 Million in French Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Indian Antitrust Body Raids Alcohol Giants Amid Price Collusion Probe
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Attorneys Seek $525 Million in Fees in NCAA Settlement Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Italy’s Competition Watchdog Ends Investigation into Booking.com
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Minnesota Judge Approves $2.4 Million Hormel Settlement in Antitrust Case
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 19, 2024 by
CPI
Effective Interoperability in Mobile Ecosystems: EU Competition Law Versus Regulation
Dec 19, 2024 by
Giuseppe Colangelo
The Use of Empirical Evidence in Antitrust: Trends, Challenges, and a Path Forward
Dec 19, 2024 by
Eliana Garces
Some Empirical Evidence on the Role of Presumptions and Evidentiary Standards on Antitrust (Under)Enforcement: Is the EC’s New Communication on Art.102 in the Right Direction?
Dec 19, 2024 by
Yannis Katsoulacos
The EC’s Draft Guidelines on the Application of Article 102 TFEU: An Economic Perspective
Dec 19, 2024 by
Benoit Durand