Find a Lawyer

HUNZA SUGAR MILLS (PVT.) LIMITED THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER FINANCE, LAHORE versus MONOPOLY CONTROL AUTHORITY

Section 3, 6, 12 and 14 disproportionate concentration of economic power improperly constrained by the conduct of trading practices under the section 14, Monopoly and Restricted Trade Relations Ordinance, 1970. The showcase notices issued were issued. In order to create artificial shortage of goods in the market, Sugar Mills was instructed to repeat the process of stopping and stopping not only the authority that a very small percentage of the total stock was sold in the market, No reasonable standard would provide that the improperly restrictive trade practice was upheld by the authority in that order did not explain how, in the first few months, higher amounts of sugar were sold in the market. Had happened Manufacturers working with Chinese manufacturers did not satisfactorily recognize the manufacturers' response to the reason notices issued to them by the authority, urging that several mills had marketed sugar in comparison to average monthly sales. Has been selling large quantities, according to which the manufacturers ignored the alleged mass. The management authority failed to consider this aspect of the matter and there was no evidence that despite the Sugar Authority's orders to the dealers, the sale of sugar was refused by the professionals, in the circumstances, Was kept separate \ r \ n law firms from Renala Khurd lawyer