Full Judgment Text
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 6
PETITIONER:
M/S INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC CO. LTD.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
H.D. SHOURIE
DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/08/1999
BENCH:
R.P.Sethi, S.Saghir Ahmed
JUDGMENT:
SETHI,J.
Alleging that the appellant herein was selling the
films as a representative of Kodak without price being
printed on the packages containing films, the respondent
filed a complaint before the District Consumer Disputes
Redressal Forum, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
District Forum’) with a prayer for the issuance of
appropriate directions to protect the interests of the
consumers. It was contended that the price printing on the
packages was mandatory under the provisions of the Packaged
Commodities Rules promulgated under the Standards of Weights
and Measures Act, 1976. The appellant put all sorts of
resistances in the disposal of the complaint. Writ
petitions were filed in the High Courts of Andhra Pradesh
and Kerala with prayer for setting aside the proceedings
pending before the District Forum. The appellant , however,
opted not to file any reply to the complaint. Being
satisfied that the High Courts, where the writ petitions had
been filed on behalf of the appellant had not stayed the
proceedings, the District Forum found that the complaint
filed was in the general interests of the consumers who were
entitled to know the price of the product which was required
to be conspicuously displayed and if that was not done, the
interests of the consumers would be jeopardised resulting in
the charging of exorbitant price by the unscrupulous
retailers dealing in the sale of Kodak films. Being
satisfied that the action of the appellant was in violation
of the rules applicable in the case, the District Forum vide
its order dated February 28, 1989 directed the appellant to
display the sale price of the film on the package in a
manner so as not to violate the order of stay passed by the
High Courts where writs were pending within one month from
the date of the order under intimation to the District
Forum. In appeal the State Consumer Disputes Redressal
Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the State
Commission’) held that it would be in the in the interest of
justice for the appellant -company to (i) publish the price
of the film in a national daily fortnightly; (ii) to print
notice on its invoice - asking the dealers to print or
attach a price tag on the film before selling it to the
customer, (iii) issue circulars to each dealer to print or
affix a price tag on each film before selling the film to
the customer and (iv) attach price tag on each unit in their
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 6
own shop/outlet before it is sold to the customer. Not
satisfied with the order of the State Commission the
appellant herein approached the National Consumers Disputes
Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as ‘the
National Commission’ who vide the order impugned dismissed
the revision petition with the following observations:-
"We would however clarify that when cartons containing
large numbers of film rolls are sold from their out-let on
wholesale basis in an unopen condition, it would constitute
sufficient compliance with the directions issued by the
State Commission. If the revision petitioner affixes to
each carton a sticker clearly indicating the price at which
each film roll is to be sold in retail and the retailers are
informed by a circular that they are not to sell the rolls
at any price exceeding what is indicated on the sticker. In
the event however, of the petitioner effecting retail sales
from their outlet in Janpath each packet containing a single
roll of film sold by them should bear a sticker showing the
price of the film roll".
It is contended on behalf of the appellant that the
District Forum, the State Commission and the National
Commission were not justified in issuing the directions to
the appellant as according to their learned counsel neither
any rule nor any statute mandated or cast upon them an
obligation to exhibit /publish or print the price on the
films rolls being imported and sold in India by its
distributor. It is submitted that sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 of
the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities
Rules, 1977 (hereinafter called ‘the Rules’) stood amended
at the relevant time which excluded the dealer from affixing
the price on the package of the film roll. The only
requirement of law was to display prominently at a
conspicuous place of the premises in which the retail
business was being carried on, the rates at which the local
taxes were leviable or at the most the price of the
commodities sold. The Consumer Protection Act, 1986 has
been enacted to provide for better protection of the
interests of the consumers by making provisions for the
establishment of consumer councils, other authorities for
the settlement of consumer disputes and for matter connected
therewith. The Act was enacted as a result of wide spread
consumer protection movement. On the basis of the report of
the Secretary General on Consumer Protection dated 27th May,
1983 , the United Nations Economic and Social Council
recommended that the world governments should develop,
strengthen and implement a coherent consumer protection
policy taking into consideration the guidelines set out
therein. Each government was obliged to set its own
priorities for the protection of consumers in accordance
with the economic and social conditions of the country
keeping in view the needs of its people and bearing in mind
the costs and benefit of the proposed legislation Government
were to further provide adequate infrastructure including
the establishment of public bodies as well as financial
facilities to develop, implement and monitor consumer
protection policies. The introduction of new products in
the developing countries was to be assessed in relation to
the local conditions having regard to the existing
production, distribution and consumption patterns of the
country or region concerned. The various enactments such as
the Contract Act, the Standards of Weights and Measures Act,
the Motor Vehicles Act , the Monopolies and Restricted Trade
Practices Act, Food Adulteration Act etc. were found to be
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 3 of 6
inadequate in providing the relief to the consumers. In
discharge of the international obligations and to protect
the interest of the consumer in the country, the Consumer
Protection Act, 1986 was enacted(hereinafter called ‘the
1986 Act ‘.) The reference to the consumer movement and the
international obligations for protection of the rights of
the consumer, provision has been made herein with the object
of interpreting the relevant law in a rational manner and
for achieving the objective setforth in the Act. Rational
approach and not a technical approach is the mandate of law.
The Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 ( Act 60 of
1976) was enacted to establish standards of weights and
measures, to regulate inter State trade or commerce in
weights and measures and other goods which are sold or
distributed by weight, measure or number and to provide for
matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. Section
83 empowers the Central Government to make rules for
carrying out the provisions of the said Act. In exercise of
the aforesaid powers, the Central Government made the "The
Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities )
Rules 1977 (hereinafter called ‘the Rules"). Chapter II
deals with the provisions applicable to packages intended
for retail sale. Rule 3 provides that the provisions of the
aforesaid Chapter shall apply to packages intended for
retail sales and the expression "packaged" when it occurs,
shall be construed accordingly. Rule 4 provides that no
person shall pre-pack or cause or permit to be pre-packed
any commodity for sale, distribution or delivery unless the
package in which the commodity is pre-packed bears thereon
or on a label securely affixed thereto such declaration as
is required to be made under the rules. According to Rule 5
specific commodities are required to be packed and sold only
in standard packages. Rule 6 as it existed at the relevant
time provided thus:-
"6.Declaration to be made on every package-(1) Every
package shall bear thereon or on a label securely affixed
thereto a definite plain and conspicuous declaration, made
in accordance with the provisions of this Chapter as, to -
(a) the name and address of the manufacturer, or where
the manufacturer is not the packer, of the packer or with
the written consent of the manufacturer, of the
manufacturer;
(b) the common or generic names of the commodity
contained in the package; Explanation:-- Generic name in
relation to a commodity means the name of the genus of the
commodity, for example, in the case of common salt, sodium
chloride is the generic name.
(c) the net quantity, in terms of the standard unit of
weight or measure, of the commodity contained in the package
or where the commodity is packed or sold by number, the
number of the commodity contained in the package;
(d) the month and year in which the commodity is
manufactured or pre-packed
(e) the unit of the commodity contained in the
packages:
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 4 of 6
Provided that this declaration is not necessary in the
case of packages packed in the standard quantities specified
in the Third Schedule and the Sixth Schedule of these rules:
Provided further that such declaration shall not be
necessary in the case of packages of these commodities which
are not specified in the Third Schedule but are packed in
quantities of 50 g. 100g. 200g, 500g 1kg. 2kg., 5kg., or
in multiples of 5 kg. Or in 50 ml, 100 ml. 200 ml. 500
ml. 1 litre, 2 litres, 5 litres and in multiples of 5
litres.
(f) the sale price of the package;
(g) where sizes of commodity contained in the package
are relevant, the dimensions of the commodity contained in
the package and if the dimensions of the different pieces
are different, the dimensions of each such different piece;
(h) such other matters as are specified in these
rules:
Provided that-
(A) no declaration as to the month and year in which
the commodity is manufactured or pre-packed shall be
required to be made on- (i) any bottle containing liquid
milk, liquid beverages containing milk as an ingredient,
soft drink, ready-to-serve fruit beverages, or the like,
which is returnable by the consumer for being refilled;
(ii) any package containing bread and any uncanned package
of (a) vegetables ,(b) fruits,(c) ice cream, (d) butter, (e)
cheese, (f) fish, (g) meat or (h) any other like commodity;
(iia) liquid milk in pouches; (iii)any package containing
metallic product; (iv) any cylinder containing liquified
petroleum gas or any other gas; (v) any package containing
chemical fertilizer;
(B) wherein any packaging material bearing thereon the
month in which any commodity was expected to have been
pre-packed is not exhausted during that month, such
packaging material may be used for pre-packing the concerned
commodity produced or manufactured during the next
succeeding month and not thereafter, but the Central
Government may, it is satisfied that such packaging material
could not be exhausted during the period aforesaid by reason
of any circumstance beyond the control of the manufacturer
or packer, as the case may be, extend the time during which
such packaging material may be used, and, where any such
packaging material is exhausted before the expiry of the
month indicated thereon, the packaging material intended to
be used during the next succeeding month may be used for
pre- packing the concerned commodity;
(C) no declaration as to the sale price shall be
required to be made on - (I) any uncanned package of (a)
vegetables, (b) fruits, (c) ice cream, (d) cheese, (e)
butter, (f) fish, (g) meat or (h) any other like commodity;
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 5 of 6
(ii) any bottle containing liquid milk, liquid beverages
containing milk as an ingredient , soft drink,
ready-to-serve fruit beverages, or the like, which is
returnable by the consumer for being refilled; (iii) any
bottle containing alcoholic beverages, or spirituous liquor;
(iv) any package containing animal feed exceeding 15 kg or
15.1; (v) any package containing a commodity for which
controlled price has been fixed by or under any law for the
time being in force. Explanation I. The month and the year
in which the commodity is pre-packed may be expressed either
in words, or by numerals indicating the month and the year,
or by both. Explanation II. Liquid milk does not include
condensed milk. (2) Every dealer or other person who makes
a retail sale of any commodity in packaged form shall, where
local taxes have to be added to the price indicated on such
package by the manufacturer or the packer, display
prominently at a conspicuous place of the premises in which
he carries on his retail sale, the rates at which local
taxes are leviable in respect of the commodities sold in
packaged form."
It is contended that sub-rule(2) of Rule 6 alone was
applicable in the case because the goods in the form of
Kodak films were being sold by the distributor and not by
the manufacturer. It is further contended that sub-rule(1)
of Rule 6 is applicable to the manufacturers alone. We are
not satisfied with such submission. Accepting such a plea
would result in frustrating the provisions of the 1986 Act
and thereby encourage the retailers or distributors of
foreign made goods to charge prices according to their
convenience without letting the consumer know the actual
price of the commodity. A perusal of Rule 6(1) of the Rules
clearly shows that the stress of the sub-rule is upon the
package and not upon the person manufacturing or selling the
package. The provisions of sub-rule (2) apparently appear
to be in addition to the obligations cast upon the
manufacturer and the dealer under sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of
the Rules. We are also not impressed with the argument of
the learned counsel for the appellant that before its
amendment on 8-8-1986, Sub-rule (2) as it then stood cast
such an obligation to display the price but not thereafter.
By amendment provisions of sub-rules (2) and (3) appears to
have been incorporated in sub-rule (2) only by deleting
sub-rule (3). The superfluous and additional words existing
in sub-rule (2) before its amendment were rightly deleted in
view of the specific provisions of Chapter II comprising
rule 3,4,5 and 6 as noted herein earlier. The dealers are,
therefore, obliged to comply with the provisions of sub-rule
(1) of Rule 6 of the Rules notwithstanding the confusion if
any conceived by them under Rule 6(2) before its amendment.
During the course of the argument the learned counsel
appearing for the respondent has shown us some packages of
the Kodak films wherein the maximum retail price inclusive
of all taxes has already been displayed. It is worth
noticing that on those packages a specific mention is made
of "not for resale outside India." It appears that the
product of Kodak films, a multi-national company are being
manufactured and distributed in India, thus neither the
manufacturer nor the distributor or retailer can escape the
liability of complying with the provisions of Rule 6 of the
Rules.
After examining the matter from various aspects, we do
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 6 of 6
not find any infirmity or illegality in the order of the
National Commission requiring interference. The appeal is
accordingly dismissed, but in the circumstances without any
order as to costs.