An antitrust case has been filed against fast-delivery companies Zomato, Swiggy, and Zepto by Indian consumer product distributors, urging the Competition Commission of India (CCI) to investigate alleged predatory discounting practices. The All India Consumer Products Distributors Federation (AICPDF) claims that the deep discounts offered by these quick-commerce platforms are creating unfair pricing models that harm smaller retailers.
The rise of quick commerce—where consumer products are delivered within 10 minutes from local warehouses—has gained popularity among customers but sparked concern among small businesses. The sector, expected to reach $35 billion by 2030, has drawn intense scrutiny, as previous investigations found that e-commerce giants like Amazon and Flipkart had engaged in predatory pricing, benefiting select sellers at the expense of smaller competitors.
The AICPDF, with 400,000 distributor members across India, argues that local brick-and-mortar stores cannot compete with the aggressive pricing strategies of Zomato’s Blinkit, Swiggy’s Instamart, and Zepto, platforms that offer discounts on everyday products such as milk and pulses. Their complaint highlights the negative impact these practices have on independent retailers, particularly smaller stores, which cannot afford to match the prices offered by these larger players.
According to the filing, a variant of Nestle’s Nescafé coffee jar, typically priced at 622 rupees ($7.14) for small retailers, is being sold for as low as 514 rupees on Zepto, 577 rupees on Swiggy Instamart, and 625 rupees on Blinkit, further underscoring the disparity between online and offline prices.
While Zomato, Swiggy, and Zepto have not responded to requests for comment, the filing could add pressure on these companies, which are already under investigation for competition law violations in their food delivery businesses. Zepto, which raised funds last year at a $5 billion valuation, is also preparing for an IPO.
The CCI will review the filing and determine if further investigation is warranted, which could take several months. If the case is found to have merit, it could require these companies to justify their discounting strategies. If dismissed, the case will be closed.