• PAGE ONE
• INDEX
• HOME

MRTPC clean chit to Knoll Pharma

Richa Mishra

NEW DELHI, April 30

KNOLL Pharmaceuticals Ltd has come out unscathed from allegations that it has increased its product prices and, therefore, was indulging in restrictive and monopolistic trade practices.

The Monopolies & Restrictive Trade Practices Commission (MRTPC), while deliberating on a complaint filed by the Director-General (Investigation & Registration), observed that ``we do not think that the present complaint attracts the provisions of Section 2(o)(ii) of the MRTP Act, 1969.''

``Accordingly, we are of the opinion that the present enquiry is not maintainable and the notice of enquiry is, therefore, discharged,'' it said.

The allegation against Knoll Pharmaceuticals was that it increased the prices of its products, namely, Digene tablets (10 tablets), Digene Syrup (200 ml), Cremaffin (200 ml) and Eptoin (100 mg) by 120 per cent, 70 per cent, 45 per cent and 86 per cent, r espectively and, thereby indulged in restrictive and monopolistic trade practices.

During the hearing, the commission observed that the contention of the company was that the Government had established an independent body called the National Pharmaceutical Pricing Authority (NPPA) to take decisions with regard to price-fixation and oth er related matters, including updating the list of drugs under price control.

This authority had also been empowered to monitor the price of non-scheduled drugs and formulations as also oversee the implementation of the provisions of the Drugs (Price Control) Order, 1995, the company submitted.

It was pointed out that the price revision of drugs in question manufactured by Knoll came within the purview of NPPA, the competent authority for fixing or monitoring the prices of these drugs, MRTPC noted.

Moreover, these drugs which are antacids and laxatives, are not essential or life-saving drugs and the consumer has a wide choice as similar drugs such as Gelusil, Mylanta and Tums are freely available in the market, the company submitted.

It was also mentioned that the company's market share of Digene tablets and gel, which are antacids, was negligible and was, therefore, not likely to have any significant impact on competition.

Considering the matter, the commission noted that an issue with regard to adoption of restrictive trade practices within the meaning of Section 2(o)(ii) only was framed, while adoption of monopolistic trade practices did not figure.

``It has been contended before us that fixation of prices and monitoring of prices of drugs are the functions of NPPA and do not fall within the ambit of the Act, more particularly, if the essential ingredient of Section 2(o), which is the impact of the alleged restrictive trade practice on competition, is missing,'' the commission observed.