Madras HC dismisses appeals by tech firms against Google billing policy

Tech companies raised concerns over Google's new service fee, which ranged between 11-26% for using third-party billing systems

Madras High Court (HC) on Friday upheld a previous single-judge decision rejecting petitions from various tech companies against Google's new user choice billing system, according to a report by Bar and Bench. A bench comprising Chief Justice SV Gangapurwala and Justice PD Audikesavalu issued the order, affirming the single-judge ruling that addressed appeals from tech companies challenging Google's billing policy last year.

The division bench had provided interim protection to these tech companies for an additional three weeks to prevent their apps from being delisted from Google Playstore.

Google Play billing policy

Google had mandated all app developers to use its Google Play Billing System (GPBS) for transactions, charging a commission between 15 to 30 per cent for services, including paid app downloads and in-app purchases. More than a dozen Indian startups and tech companies, including Bharat Matrimony, Shadi.com, Unacademy, and Kuku FM, Alt Digital Media, and Info Edge, filed civil appeals against the tech giant and its subsidiaries, opposing the new policy.

 

Last August, a single-judge bench dismissed fourteen out of sixteen pleas filed by Indian startups and tech companies, stating that the matter fell under the jurisdiction of the Competition Commission of India (CCI).

ALSO READ: Madras HC dismisses pleas of 14 firms against Google billing policy

The CCI, in October 2022, imposed a penalty of Rs 936 crore on Google and instructed it not to restrict app developers from using third-party billing services, emphasising the removal of discriminatory conditions.

Google then updated its billing system to allow users to choose "an alternative billing" option alongside GPBS, permitting app developers to use third-party billing systems but imposing a service fee ranging from 11 to 26 per cent. Tech companies, including Matrimony and others, opposed this fee, leading to a legal challenge in the Madras High Court, which has now been dismissed.