TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (11) TMI 359
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ch of appeals which arise out of the judgments and orders passed by the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission ('the Commission'), New Delhi whereby and where under advertisements issued by the appellant herein announcing a contest was held to be an unfair trade practice within the meaning thereof. The fact of the matter is being noted from Colgate Palmolive (India) Ltd. v. Monopolies & Restrictive Trade Practices Commission [Civil Appeal No. 891 of 1993]. The appellant had inserted an advertisement in several newspapers in September 1984 announcing a contest known as 'Colgate Trigard Family Good Habits Contest'. 'Trigard' is the name of tooth brush manufactured by the appellant. By reason of the said advertisement, a c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ush. The best entry in this regard would win the first prize. There were several other prizes for second, third and fourth winners. In all there were fifty prizes. Appellant further offered 825 consolation prizes of Rs. 100 each and 1200 early bird prizes of Rs. 50 each to be awarded to those 100 entries which were received first every week. The last mentioned prizes were irrespective of whether the answers to the questions were correct or not and irrespective of the merit of the slogan which was to be provided by the contestant. A complaint was made to the Commission alleging that the said contest which was organised by the appellant for the purpose of promotion or sale of its product was in its own interest and prejudicial to the in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppellant herein filed his reply pleading, inter alia, that such contest did not cause loss or injury to the consumers by eliminating and restricting competition or otherwise. It was contended that the contest was educative inasmuch as by inducing the users of the tooth-brushes to think upon the questions of the contest, they would be made aware of the necessity to keep good dental health. It was pointed out that the best answer to the question was to be judged by three eminent persons from different fields being the Editor of Illustrated Weekly, the Editor of Eves Weekly and a T.V. personality and thus there was no element or chance of arbitrariness in the selection of the winning slogan. A Bench of the Commission consisting of Mr. H.C. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... week. This aspect of the contest has nothing to do with the skill and was based totally on chance. The number of losers in terms of money in this part of the contest cannot be insignificant. The early bird aspect of the contest was purely in the nature of lottery." Mr. Ashok Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant would, in support of the Appeal, urge that the Commission committed a manifest error of law in arriving at the aforementioned conclusion by misreading and misinterpreting the provisions of section 36A(3)(b) of the M.R.T.P. Act. The learned counsel pointed out that the Commission did not find any actual loss or injury caused to the consumers by reason of the said advertisement nor any allegation in th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...., use or supply of any goods or the provision of any services; 3.The trade practice should fall within the ambit of one or more of the categories enumerated in clauses (1) to (5) of section 36A; 4.The trade practice should cause loss or injury to the consumers of goods or services; 5.The trade practice under clause (1) should involve making a 'statement' whether orally or in writing or by visible representation. Causation of loss or injury thus is a sine qua non for invoking the principles of section 36A of the M.R.T.P. Act. The Commission, in our considered opinion, committed a manifest error in holding that the actual loss or injury is not an essential ingredient of the unfair trade practice. It is now a well-settled princi....