On January 16, the Supreme Court heard Google's petition challenging the order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) that refused to stay the Competition Commission of India's (CCI) decision to levy a Rs 1,338 crore penalty on it for unfair and anti-competitive practises in relation to Android phones. The NCLAT refused to stay the CCI's order on January 6 and ordered Google to deposit 10% of the penalty amount within three weeks.

Senior Advocate AM Singhvi mentioned the case before a bench comprised of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud and Justice PS Narasimha. While urging for an early listing, Sr Adv AM Singhvi stated that the CCI had issued extraordinary directions.

Google LLC (formerly Google Inc.) is a Delaware limited liability company and Alphabet Inc.'s wholly owned subsidiary. Google offers a variety of information technology services as well as an internet search engine. Chrome, Gmail, Google Drive, Google Maps, Android, Google Play, Search, and YouTube are Google's primary business activities. Google India Private Limited ("Google India") is a Google LLC indirect subsidiary. To run applications and programmes on smart phones, an operating system is required. Google purchased one of these mobile operating systems, Android, in 2005. Consumers of Android-based smart phones filed a complaint against Google LLC and Google India under Section 19(1)(a) of the Competition Act of 2002, alleging that Google abused its dominant position in the mobile operating system markets. The Competition Commission of India ("CCI") Bench comprising of Mr. Ashok Kumar Gupta (Chairperson), Ms. Sangeeta Verma (Member) and Mr. Bhagwant Singh Bishnoi (Member), while adjudicating the complaint in Mr. Umar Javeed & Ors. v Google LLC & Anr., Case No. 39 of 2018, examined Google's Android mobile operating system and proprietary mobile applications such as Play Store, Google Search, Google Chrome, YouTube, etc.

The CCI Bench imposed a monetary penalty of Rs. 1337.76 Crore on Google for abusing its dominant position in multiple markets, invoking its powers under Section 27 of the Competition Act. The Bench also issued a stop-work order against Google for engaging in anti-competitive practises that were found to be in violation of Section 4 of the Competition Act. Google was also told to change its behaviour within a certain time frame.

Case Title: Mr. Umar Javeed and Others Vs. Google LLC and Another
Citation: Case No 39/2018