CCI Clears BookMyShow of Abuse Allegations; Finds No Evidence of Foreclosure Despite Market Leadership

On 12 March 2026, the CCI closed allegations of abuse of dominance against BookMyShow (BMS) in the online movie ticketing segment.[1] The informant, a competing platform operator, Showtyme, alleged that BMS leveraged its dominant position to impose unfair conditions on cinemas, including exclusive agreements, revenue-sharing disparities, inventory reservation, and restrictive data-sharing practices, thereby foreclosing competition and inflating ticket prices.

The CCI defined the relevant market as the market for online intermediation services for booking of movie tickets in India and concurred that BMS holds a dominant position, supported by its significant market share, first-mover advantage, network effects, strong financials, and extensive cinema partnerships. However, on merits, it disagreed with several of the Director General’s (DG) findings.

First, on seat inventory reservation, the CCI accepted that such practices were operationally necessary, particularly in smaller cities lacking real-time integration, to prevent double booking between online platforms and box-office sales, and found no evidence of unfair conditions.

Second, on data-sharing practices, the CCI held that differential treatment between multiplexes and single-screen cinemas did not amount to discrimination under Section 4, as these entities are not similarly situated. Variations in infrastructure, scale, and technical capabilities justified differentiated contractual arrangements.

Third, regarding revenue-sharing arrangements linked to convenience fees, the CCI emphasised that it is not a price regulator and found that variations were based on legitimate commercial considerations such as scale and cost structures, with no evidence of discrimination among similarly placed entities.

Finally, on exclusive agreements and alleged market foreclosure, the extent of foreclosure was not substantiated. The presence of competing platforms such as Paytm, Justickets, and Amazon, along with the limited proportion of exclusive agreements and the staggered expiry of lock-in periods, indicated that the market remained contestable. The CCI also accepted that lock-in clauses and advance payments were commercially justified to enable recovery of financial outlays. Relying on its earlier jurisprudence, the CCI reiterated that exclusive arrangements do not per se violate competition law absent demonstrable foreclosure. Accordingly, it found no contravention of Sections 4(2)(a), 4(2)(b), or 4(2)(c), and closed the matter.

Business Takeaway:

The decision highlights that even dominant digital platforms retain commercial flexibility in structuring agreements, provided such arrangements are objectively justified and do not foreclose competition. Differential treatment across business partners will not amount to discrimination unless applied to similarly situated entities. Importantly, exclusivity and lock-in clauses, when supported by legitimate business rationale and absent demonstrable market foreclosure, are unlikely to attract antitrust liability.

[1] CCI: In Re: Showtyme (through Vijay Gopal, Prop. of Vanila Entertainments) and Big Tree Entertainment Pvt. Ltd. (BookMyShow), Case No. 46 of 2021, order dated 12 March 2026.