Consumer forum orders Emami's Fair & Handsome to withdraw misleading ads, pay ₹15 lakh damages

The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (Commission) in Delhi's Central District found Emami found Emami (opposite party/ OP) guilty of unfair trade practices and misleading advertisements related to its "Fair and Handsome" fairness cream..The coram of President lnder Jeet Singh and member Rashmi Bansal found that the company’s claims of providing fair skin to users in three weeks were deceptive and unsupported by evidence, violating consumer rights. “The conclusions drawn above, makes it crystal clear that the OP is offering the product - Fair and Handsome cream with few, negligible and limited instructions on the packaging and labeling that its use regular use for three weeks will result into fairness in the skin of man, despite knowing that instructions mentioned are incomplete instructions and for want of following the other requirements, it will not give the result claimed. ...this proves misleading advertisement and unfair trade practice that in order to promote product and sales, such strategy was adopted by the OP,” the Commission heldTherefore, it ordered the withdrawal of all such misleading advertisements and packaging while also awarding punitive damages of ₹15 lakh out of which ₹14.5 lakh is to be deposited with the Delhi State Consumer Welfare Fund and ₹50,000 has to be paid to the complainant. “ The complaint is partly allowed in favour of complainant and against the OP while directing OP (i) to discontinue the unfair trade practice in respect of its product, to withdraw those packages, labels, advertisements either of its brand ambassador or otherwise and not to re-exhibit by mode of audio or visual or combination of both forthwith; (ii) to deposit punitive damages of Rs.14,50,000/- in the Delhi State Consumer Welfare Fund (its receipt will be furnished to this Commission in time), (iii) to pay balánce punitive damages Rs. 50,000/- (which includes loss amount of Rs.79l-) to the complainant as determined and payable and (iv) to pay costs of Rs.10,000/- to the complainant. The amount will be deposited and payable within 45 days from the date of this order,” the Commission held..This is second time the Commission has passed this order.In 2015, it had ruled in favour of the complainant. However, upon appeal, the State Commission overturned this decision in 2017 and remanded the case back to the District Commission for a fresh hearing and also directed that the case should be decided after considering evidences of the parties and other material..The case arose from a complaint filed by Nikhil Jain (complainant) filed against Emami Limited alleging unfair trade practices and misleading advertisements for their product "Fair and Handsome Cream." Jain claimed that he purchased the product for ₹79 and used it as per the instructions provided. Despite this, the product failed to deliver the promised results, such as fairness and other benefits, making it defective. As part of the relief, he sought corrective advertisements for one year, punitive damages amounting to ₹19.9 lakh and litigation costs of ₹10,000.In defense, Emami Limited denied all allegations, asserting that the product was scientifically tested and complied with all regulatory standards. The company argued that the complaint lacked merit as there was no sufficient evidence to prove the allegations. They also contended that the complainant failed to provide proper proof of purchase and expert opinion regarding the product’s effectiveness.Emami further contended that the product had undergone various tests and was designed for specific conditions, such as protecting against UV rays and improving skin quality for users aged 16–35..However, the Commission rejected these contentions noting that the packaging and advertisements of "Fair and Handsome" were misleading since it created an impression that the product would deliver fairness within three weeks though the conditions required to achieve the promised results were not mentioned. The Commission deemed this to be an unfair trade practice. .It added that the damages should be of such an extent that they would actually "pinch" the defaulter, so that it deters others from engaging in conduct similar conduct.Accordingly, the Commission imposed ₹15 lakh in punitive damages on Emami and directed the company to withdraw deceptive advertisements and packaging. The damages have to be paid within 45 days of the order.Advocate Paras Jain appeared for the complainant Nikhil Jain. .[Read Order]