The Aryavarth Express
Aryavarth(Kolkata): The Calcutta High Court recently dismissed a writ petition filed by Hoichoi Technologies Private Limited and its Director against Google and its group companies, alleging that they were acting as Payment Aggregators (PAs) without proper authorization under the Payment and Settlement Systems Act, 2007 (PSS Act) and the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Guidelines on Regulation of Payment Aggregators and Payment Gateways dated March 17, 2020.
The petitioners sought a mandamus directing the RBI to initiate adjudicative proceedings against Google and its group companies and sought protection from being forced to accept the Google Play Billing System (GPBS) for payment transactions on the Google Play Store. They also sought a restraint on Google from delisting Hoichoi’s app from the Play Store for non-adoption of the GPBS.
The Court noted that the primary reliefs sought by the petitioners were contradictory to the prayers for mandamus, as the Court could not usurp the RBI’s jurisdiction to decide the core issues pending adjudication. The Court also observed that the petitioners had filed the writ petition just a day after submitting their complaint to the RBI, without giving the RBI sufficient time to address the issues raised.
Analyzing the agreements between Hoichoi and Google, the Court found that Google charged service fees for hosting apps on its platform and providing ancillary services, and these fees were charged only if the apps earned from third parties. The Court also noted that Google Play merely offered different payment methods, including GPay operated by Google India Digital Services Private Limited, which is an authorized PA, but did not itself act as a PA.
The Court held that the petitioners had not made out a prima facie case that Google and its group companies were operating as PAs without proper accreditation or registration in India. The issues raised were arguable and needed to be decided by the RBI, which is the designated regulatory and adjudicatory authority under the PSS Act.
Dismissing the writ petition, the Court expressed hope and trust that the RBI would decide the issues raised by the petitioners as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 12 weeks. The Court clarified that the merits of the contentions had not been entered into and that it would be open for all jurisdictional fora, including the RBI and the Competition Commission of India (CCI), to adjudicate the issues on their own merits.
