This study explores the growing tension between competition law and intellectual property rights, especially in the context of Standard Essential Patent (SEPs). As industries worldwide move toward unifying technological ecosystems like 5G, 6G, and the Internet of Things. Interoperability has become a prerequisite for entering the market. This dependence creates a unique paradox: the exclusive monopoly granted by patent law often collides with Competition law’s mission to prevent market foreclosure. At the center of this debate lies FRAND commitment Fair, Reasonable, and Non- Discriminatory licensing terms designed to reduce the risk of “Patent-hold up” while also protecting against “Patent-hold out” by implementers. This essay looks closely at the controversial use of injunctive relief as a tool for asserting market power, and at the evolving legal standards for determining FRAND Royalty rates. By comparing recent judicial developments in the US, India and the EU, the study evaluates whether existing regulatory frameworks truly manage to balance he two competing goals: safeguarding open competition and preserving incentives for innovation. This paper argues for a global licensing framework for the Standard Essential Patent (SEPs), built on greater transparency in “essentiality checks” and supported by specialized mechanism for resolving disputes. Such an approach is presented as key to overcoming the current FRAND deadlock ensuring that technological progress is not stalled and that antitrust principles are not determined.