Holding

A dealer, distributor or retailer cannot escape liability and must comply with Rule 6(1) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 by displaying the sale price on each package; Rule 6(2) is merely supplementary.

Summary

The respondent filed a consumer complaint alleging that India Photographic Co. Ltd., a distributor of Kodak film rolls, sold the rolls without printing the sale price on each package, contrary to Rule 6(1)(t) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The District Consumer Forum, the State Commission and the National Commission all directed the appellant to display the price, either on the package or via stickers on cartons for wholesale sales. The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the rule applied only to manufacturers and that an amendment to Rule 6(2) had removed the dealer’s duty to print the price. The Court held that the obligation to display the sale price rests on the package itself, not on who manufactures or sells it, and therefore dealers/distributors must also comply with Rule 6(1); Rule 6(2) adds further obligations but does not relieve the dealer of the price‑display duty. The Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the National Commission’s directions.

Issues considered

Whether Rule 6(1)(t) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 imposes a duty on dealers/distributors/retailers to print the sale price on each package of film rolls.
Whether the amendment to Rule 6(2) on 8‑8‑1986 eliminated the dealer’s obligation to display the price.
Whether compliance via stickers on wholesale cartons satisfies the statutory requirement.
Whether the consumer forums acted within the jurisdiction conferred by the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.

Legislation cited

Subjects

consumer protectionprice labelingpackaged commoditiesstandards of weights and measuresdealer obligationsrule interpretationSupreme Court

Judgment

M/S INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC CO. LTD. A
v.
H.D. SHOURIE

AUGUST 3, 1999

[S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND R.P. SETHI, JJ.] B

.. ,, The Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules,
1977:

Rules 6(1)(/) and 6(2)-Film rolls manufactured abroad but distributed c
in India-Sale price not printed on film rolls-Held, Dealer to print sale
price on packaged roll offilm-Rule 6(1) applicable to the manufacturer as
well as distributor or retailer-Provisions of Rule 6(2) with regard to dealer
are in addition to obligations of dealer under Rule 6(1).

A complaint was filed by the respondent before the District Consumer
D
Disputes Redressal Forum, Delhi in the interest of the general public. It was
alleged that the appellant was selling film rolls as a representative of Kodak,
without printing the price on the packages of the films. It was contended that
it was mandatory under Section 6 (1) (t) of the Standards of Weights and
Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 to print on every package E
the price of the package.

The District Forum held that the appellant had violated the Rules and,
accordingly, directed the appellant to display the sale price of the film on the
package. In appeal, the State Commission confirmed the order of the District
Forum and gave further directions. F

The National Commission dismissed the rev1S1on petition while
clarifying that if cartons containing a large number of film rolls are sold
~y the appellant on wholesale basis, it would be sufficient compliance if he
1

affixes on each carton a sticker indicating the price at which each film roll G
is to be sold in retail. It further clarified that if retail sales are effected from
the appellant's outlet, each packet containing a single roll of film should
bear the price sticker.

>.
ln appeal before this Court it was contended by the appellant that there
...;..
9
H
10 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (1999] SUPP. I S.C.R.

A was no statutory mandate to publish/print the price of film rolls being
imported and sold in India by a distributor. It was submitted that Ruic 6(1)
of the Rules is applicable to the manufacturers alone and not to the dealers;
that Rule 6(2) of the Rules alone was applicable since the films were being
sold by the distributor and not by the manufacturer; the Rule stood amended
B at the relevant time and excluded the dealer from affixing the price on the
package of the film roll; and that the only requirement of law for a dealer
was to display at its premises of retail business the rates of local taxes
leviable, as provided in Rule 6(2).

Dismissing the Appeal, the Court
c HELD : 1. Neither the manufacturer nor the distributor or retailer can
escape the liability of complying with the provisions of Rule 6 of the Standards
of Weight and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977. The stress
of sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Rules is upon the package and not upon the
person manufacturing or selling the package. A dealer/distributor also has
D to comply with the provisions of Rule 6(1). (16-B-D-E]

2.1. The provisions of sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 of the Rules are in
addition to the obligations cast upon the manufacturer and dealer under sub-
rule (1) of Rule 6 of the Rules. [16-B-C)

E 2.2. It cannot be said that after the amendment of Rule 6(2) of the Rules
on 8.8.86 there is no obligation on the dealers to display the price. By the
amendment, only the superfluous words in Sub-rule (2) have been deleted
while recasting and combining sub-rules (2) and (3). The dealers are,
therefore, obliged to comply with the provisions of sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of
F the Rules, notwithstanding the confusion, if any, conceived by them under
Rule 6(2) prior to its amendment. [16-C-D]

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 53 I 0 of 1990.

From the Judgment and Order dated 13. 7 .90 of the National Consumer
G Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Revision Petition No. 26 of
1990.

R.F. Nariman, Suresh Vohra and Bharat Deepak for Mis. Rajinder Narain
& Co., for the Appellant.

H Ms. Neeru Vaid and S. Muralidhar for the Respondent.
INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC CO. LTD. v. H.D. SHOURIE [SETHI, J.] 11

The Judgment of the Court was delivered by A
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 B
the consumers. It was contended that the price printed on the packages was
mandatory under the provisions of the Packaged Commodities Rules
promulgated under the Standards o:f 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 C
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 proce~dings, the District Forum
fom1.d 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 D
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 E
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 interest of justice for the appellant - company to (i) publish F
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 own shop/outlet before it is sold to the G
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:- H
12 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A "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
B 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".
c 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
D 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
E 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
F 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 an~ implement a
G 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 bodies as well as financial
H facilities to develop, implement and monitor consumer protection policies. The .(
INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC CO. LTD. v. H.D. SHOURIE (SETHI, J.] 13

introduction of new products in the developing countries was to be assessed A
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 inadequate B
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 C
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 D
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 E
(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 F
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 G
r'·
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
manufactu~er is not the packer, of the packer or with the written H
14 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999] SUPP. l S.C.R.
.... .J
A consent 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
B 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;
c
(d) the month and year in which the commodity is manufactured or
pre-packed;
(e) the unit of the commodity contained in the packages:

Provided that this declaration is not necessary in the case of packages
D 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., lOOg., 200g.,
E 500g., lkg., 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.

(t) the sale price of the package;
(g) where sizes of commodity contained in the package are relevant,
F 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-
G
(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 .(

H containing bre~d and any uncanned package of (a) vegetables, (b)
INDIA PHOTOGRAPHIC CO. LTD. v. H.D. SHOURIE [SETHI, J.] 15
fruits,(c) ice cream, (d) butter, (e) cheese, (t) fish, (g) meat or (h) any A
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 B
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, if it is satisfied that such packaging material could C
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 D
for pre- packing·t.he 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 E
commodity; (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 F
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 JI. Liquid milk does
not include condensed milk. (2) Every dealer or other person who G
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 m'anufacturer 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 Ieviable in respect of the
>
commodities sold in packaged form." H
16 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1999) SUPP. 1 S.C.R.

A 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 sofd by the
distributor and not by the manufacturer. It is further contended that sub-
rule(l) 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
B 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( l) of the Rules clearly shows that the stress of the sub-rule is upon
the package and not upon the perso1,1 manufacturing or selling the package.
The provisions of sub-rule (2) apparently appear to be in addition to the
C 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 di~play 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
D and additional words existing in sub-rule (2) before its amendment were
rightly deleted in view of the specific provisions of Chapter II comprrsing 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)
E 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
F 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 not find any
G infirmity or illegality in the order of the National Commission requiring
interference. The· appeal is accordingly dismis.sed, but- in the circumstances
without any order as to costs.

S.K. Appeal dismissed.