CCI competition order Case No. 46 of 2021 · 12 Mar 2026
Official title
Showtyme (through Vijay Gopal, Prop. of Vanila Entertainments) And Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (BookMyShow)
Summary
Check the official recordThe Competition Commission of India (CCI) investigated allegations that Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (BookMyShow) abused its dominant position in the online movie ticketing market. The Informant alleged that BookMyShow engaged in anti-competitive practices, including exclusive agreements with cinemas, discriminatory revenue sharing, and seat reservation policies that denied market access to competitors. While the CCI confirmed that BookMyShow holds a dominant position in the relevant market for online intermediation services for booking movie tickets in India, it concluded that the evidence did not establish a contravention of Sections 4(2)(a)(i), 4(2)(b)(i), or 4(2)(c) of the Competition Act, 2002. The Commission found the challenged practices to be commercially justified and closed the matter.
Key dates
Who is affected
If you do not comply
PUBLIC VERSION
Case No. 46 of 2021
Page 1 of 32
COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA Case No. 46 of 2021
In Re: Showtyme (through Vijay Gopal, Prop. of Vanila Entertainments)
Prop. of Vanila Entertainments 12-13-1085/72, 3rd Floor, Street No.1, Shirdi Sai Nagar, Tarnaka, Secunderabad, Telangana - 500017
Informant
And
Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (BookMyShow)
3rd Floor, H. No. 8-2-248/1/757/57A, Plot No. 57, Road No. 3, Nagarjuna Circle Road, Beside ICICI Bank Lane, Nagarjuna Hills, Hyderabad, Telangana – 500082 Head Office: Ground Floor, Wajeda House, Gulmohar Cross, Road No. 7, Juhu Scheme, Mumbai, Maharashtra - 400049 Opposite Party
CORAM:
Ravneet Kaur Chairperson
Anil Agrawal Member
Sweta Kakkad Member
Deepak Anurag Member
PUBLIC VERSION
Case No. 46 of 2021
Page 2 of 32
Present: For Informant:
None For Opposite Party:
ORDER
In the present matter, Information was filed by Vijay Gopal (‘Informant’) under Section 19(l)(a) of the Competition Act, 2002 (‘Act’) against Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (‘BookMyShow’/‘BMS’/‘OP-1’), Asian Multiplexes Pvt. Ltd. (‘Asian Cinemas’/‘OP-2’), Indra Cineplex LLP (‘Indra Cinemas’/‘OP-3’), Cinepolis India Pvt. Ltd. (‘Cinepolis’/‘OP-4’), INOX Leisure Ltd. (‘INOX’/‘OP-5’), PVR Ltd. (‘PVR’/‘OP-6’) and Sudarshan Theater 35MM (‘Sudarshan’/‘OP-7’). The Informant also arrayed Principal Secretary, Home Department, State of Telangana; Hyderabad City Police Commissioner (Cinemas Licensing Authority for Hyderabad); Telangana State Film Development Corporation Ltd. and Central Consumer Protection Council as OP-8, OP-9, OP-10 and OP-11, respectively, alleging contravention of the provisions of Sections 3 and 4 of the Act. Brief facts and allegations, as stated in the Information
The Informant is stated to be a social activist and the founder of an online movie ticketing portal Showtyme, registered in the name of Vanila Entertainments, a proprietorship concern, which is stated to have been launched on 09.11.2021 to provide an alternative to the cine-goers in Hyderabad (later across India) to book their movie tickets online.
OP-1 is stated to be a movie ticketing portal/website which holds at least 90% market share in movie ticket booking industry in India.
PUBLIC VERSION
Case No. 46 of 2021
Page 3 of 32
It is alleged by the Informant that OP-1 charges Rs. 25/- per ticket as convenience fee from consumers who avail the facility of online booking of tickets and it shares 50% of the same ranging from Rs. 12-14/- per ticket with the multiplexes and commission ranging from Rs. 6-8/- per ticket with standalone/single screen theatres. In contrast, the Informant’s portal Showtyme was stated to be offering commission up to Rs. 5/- per ticket both to multiplexes and theatres out of Rs. 11/- per ticket charged by it. It is alleged that despite this, multiplexes and theatres were unable to associate with Showtyme due to cash loans/monetary deposits given on ‘zero interest’ by OP-1 to cinemas.
The Informant has also alleged that OP-1 has signed ‘exclusive and refusal to deal’ agreements with cinemas for a period ranging from 2-5 years and owing to these agreements, the cinemas are bound to sell their movie tickets only through OP-1, despite it charging unreasonable and exorbitant charges under the guise of convenience fee. This has led to an overall increase in price of movie tickets inclusive of convenience fee of up to Rs. 19-25/- per ticket, which is detrimental to consumers.
The Informant has stated that it has approached more than 30 cinemas and theatre managements in person and all multiplexes via email, in Hyderabad. Some of them confirmed that they could not sell their tickets through Showtyme since they had taken monetary deposits and signed exclusive agreements with OP-1. According to the Informant, this has created a barrier for new entrants like Showtyme and also increased the prices for the end-consumers.
The Informant has also averred that the owner of OP-2 (which runs more than 100 screens in the State of Telangana) who is also the President of the Telangana State Film Chamber of Commerce (‘TSFCC’) - a private organization formed by producers, distributors, exhibitors to protect their interests and provide a common platform, has entered into an agreement with OP-1, taken monetary deposits and agreed not to sell their movie tickets through any other online platform except OP-1.
Similarly, the owner of OP-7 and the Vice President of TSFCC has allowed placement of more than 50% of tickets for sale through the online platform of OP-1, which is in
PUBLIC VERSION
Case No. 46 of 2021
Page 4 of 32
violation of G.O. Ms. 47 of 2006 dated 10.03.2006 issued by Telangana State Home (Genl. A) Department, which provides for reserving at least 50% of the tickets for sale in the licensed booking office at the cinema/theatre.
The Informant has also stated that he submitted various complaints to licensing and other authorities in the State of Telangana and has also given a representation in this regard, to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Government of India on 04.11.2021. It is stated that OP-1 was found guilty of unfair trade practice by the Hyderabad Consumer Court-III for collecting exorbitant charges as ‘Internet Handling Fee’ (now convenience fee).
According to the Informant, OP-1 is abusing its dominant position in contravention of Section 4 of the Act by imposing unfair and discriminatory conditions on the theatres/multiplexes i.e., making them sign contracts for sale of 100% tickets on its platform. It is submitted that the presence of agreements between OP-1 to OP-6 are affecting fair competition and thereby, violating Section 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), 4(2)(c) and 4(2)(d) of the Act.
Based on the above allegations and averments, the Informant has prayed to the Commission for grant of the following reliefs: a. Declare the agreements amongst OP-1 with OP-2 to OP-7, if found exclusive, as illegal and anti-competitive; b. Impose penalty under Section 27 of the Act; c. Direct OP-1 under Section 28 of the Act to sell not more than 25% of its tickets of any cinemas in the State of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh and not more than 50% of the tickets in the rest of India, on its platform; d. Reimburse the litigation cost of Rs. 5000/- and Re.1/- for mental trauma etc. to the Informant. e. Direct OP-1 to OP-6 and all traders in India to discontinue practices of ‘not dealing with others’ and abuse of dominant position.
PUBLIC VERSION
Case No. 46 of 2021
Page 5 of 32
The Informant has also prayed for interim relief under Section 33 of the Act based on the averments made above and requested the Commission to direct OP-8 and OP-9 to submit a report on action taken on the representations of the Informant within a time- bound manner. Prima-facie order of the Commission passed under Section 26(1) of the Act
The Commission in its order dated 16.06.2022 passed under Section 26(1) of the Act, noted the contents of the Informant’s letter dated 21.01.2025 and in view of the same, opined that primary allegation under Section 4 of the Act requires deliberation qua the conduct of OP-1 only. The Commission, being of the view that there is no requirement of other parties to be treated as Opposite Parties for the purpose of proceedings, directed that the case title of the present case be amended as ‘In Re: Showtyme (through Vijay Gopal) and Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd.’. Accordingly, names of OP-2 to OP-11 were deleted and BookMyShow/OP-1 remains the sole Opposite Party (‘OP’).
After perusing the material on record, the Commission noted that the grievance of the Informant pertains to exclusive agreement/arrangement between OP and certain cinemas/multiplexes in the city of Hyderabad, Telangana whereby, the Informant is allegedly prevented from offering the services of his website Showtyme to cinemas for online booking of tickets. After considering the two-sided platform in which OP operates, the Commission opined that the services provided by an online intermediary platform (like OP) for booking of movie tickets is distinct and not interchangeable or substitutable by other modes of booking. Thus, the Commission identified the relevant market as the ‘market for online intermediation services for booking of movie tickets in India.’ From the data available in the public domain, the Commission noted that OP’s share for 2017-18 in terms of booking volume was 70-80%. The Commission further observed that the ability of OP to enter into exclusive agreements …… VVVNN…... in India further corroborates its position of strength and the various provisions in its agreements with cinema/theatres/multiplexes, indicate its superior bargaining power in deciding contractual terms. These factors, taken together, prima facie appeared to substantiate the dominant position enjoyed by OP in the relevant market.
