You can access the court order from here.
The Competition Commission of India (CCI) has dismissed a complaint against Eternal Ltd. (formerly Zomato Ltd.) The Commission found no prima facie violation of the Competition Act in the company’s pricing practices, including platform fees, delivery charges and differences between restaurant prices and prices on the app.
In an order dated July 23, 2026, the CCI closed the case under Section 26(2) of the Competition Act. It found no prima facie contravention of Sections 3 or 4. It also rejected the complainant’s request for interim relief seeking an immediate halt to the collection of platform fees.
What the complaint alleged: The complaint was filed by R. Suresh, who alleged that Zomato abused its dominant position by charging unfair fees and forcing restaurants to increase menu prices. The complaint stemmed from an order placed on April 13, 2026. The complainant bought Ghee Pongal from Sree Ariya Bhavan through Zomato.
According to the complaint, the food item’s base price on Zomato was Rs 123.50. The total bill reached Rs 198 after adding a Rs 43 delivery fee, a Rs 14.90 platform fee and applicable GST. The complainant later bought the same item directly from the restaurant for Rs 105, including GST. He alleged that restaurants increase prices on the platform because Zomato deducts around 33% as commission. He also claimed that restaurants have to spend on advertisements to remain visible on the platform.
The complainant argued that Zomato introduced a platform fee of around Rs 2 per order in 2023. He alleged that the company later increased it to Rs 14.90 per order without providing any corresponding service. The complaint further alleged excessive commissions, overlapping charges, drip pricing and unfair pricing conditions imposed on both consumers and restaurants. The complaint sought an investigation into Zomato’s conduct. It also sought disclosure of the company’s pricing methodology and commission structure. The complainant further sought an end to platform fees, corrective measures, penalties and a cease-and-desist order.
CCI’s assessment of the charges: The CCI said the allegations regarding platform fees and pricing fell under the abuse of dominance provisions. It said the allegations did not relate to anti-competitive agreements. Therefore, it did not examine them further under Section 3.
On the pricing difference, the Commission said selling food through an online platform involves additional services beyond the food itself. “The business model of selling food items through restaurant and online food delivery services are different. So, price of a food product varies in both the models.“
The CCI also noted that online food delivery platforms operate as multi-sided businesses. They charge consumers platform and delivery fees for online ordering and delivery services. They also charge restaurants commissions for listing and selling food on the…
Source link
Disclaimer
We strive to uphold the highest ethical standards in all of our reporting and coverage. We blogs.grocliq.com want to be transparent with our readers about any potential conflicts of interest that may arise in our work. It’s possible that some of the investors we feature may have connections to other businesses, including competitors or companies we write about. However, we want to assure our readers that this will not have any impact on the integrity or impartiality of our reporting. We are committed to delivering accurate, unbiased news and information to our audience, and we will continue to uphold our ethics and principles in all of our work. Thank you for your trust and support.
Website Upgradation is going on for any glitch kindly connect at [email protected]
