Poovayya acknowledged that the pleading could have been phrased in a better way and sought the Court’s permission to file an additional affidavit to clarify this aspect of territorial jurisdiction.
“I have all-India contracts…CCI investigation was against Swiggy and Zomato and in the investigation, Swiggy was found to be dominant in South India and Zomato was found dominant in North India…Para 81 should have been worded better…I will file an affidavit on entire events that have transpired,” Poovayya said.
Justice Kamal added,
“If you see the judgments … central point is that of ’cause of action’, which has to be culled out from the petition. Subject to you filing affidavit, Court is not convinced.”
“This is the price I pay for court having read the papers!” Poovayya replied, in a lighter vein.
“Please give me the opportunity, I will file (an affidavit)…This will have far-reaching ramifications,” the senior lawyer added.
Source: Barandbench
