LexYASH RAJ FILMS PRIVATE LIMITED versus AFREEN FATIMA ZAIDI & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
* Author [2024] 5 S.C.R. 143 : 2024 INSC 328 Yash Raj Films Private Limited v. Afreen Fatima Zaidi & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 4422 of 2024) 22 April 2024 [Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha* and Aravind Kumar, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Respondent no.1-complainant decided to go to watch a movie on the silver screen with her family. However, she found that the movie did not contain the song, which was widely circulated for promoting and publicising the movie. Whether there is any ‘deficiency’ in the provision of the entertainment service that the consumer has availed by paying the consideration through the purchase of a ticket. The complainant alleges that there is ‘deficiency’ in the service because what was shown in the film was not as per what was promised. Whether it is an ‘unfair trade practice’ giving rise to a cause of action. Headnotes Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Legal implications of a promotional trailer – Contractual relationship – Unfair trade practice – Complainant did not find a song in a movie, which was widely circulated for promoting and publicising movie – Consumer complaint filed – The District forum dismissed the complaint – The State Commission held that the appellant has engaged in an unfair trade practice as the song in the promotional trailer was widely circulated but not shown in the film – The NCDRC held that the exclusion of the song from the movie will also constitute a deficiency, as defined in s.2(1)(g) of the C.P. Act, if the song is impliedly promised, but is later omitted while exhibiting the movie – Correctness: Held: A promotional trailer is unilateral – It is only meant to encourage a viewer to purchase the ticket to the movie, which is an independent transaction and contract from the promotional trailer – A promotional trailer by itself is not an offer and neither intends to nor can create a contractual relationship – Since the promotional trailer is not an offer, there is no possibility of it 144 [2024] 5 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports becoming a promise – Therefore, there is no offer, much less a contract, between the appellant and the complainant to the effect that the song contained in the trailer would be played in the movie and if not played, it will amount to deficiency in the service – The transaction of service is only to enable the complainant to watch the movie upon the payment of consideration in the form of purchase of the movie ticket – This transaction is unconnected to the promotional trailer, which by itself does not create any kind of right of claim with respect to the content of the movie – The promotional trailer does not fall under any of the instances of “unfair method or unfair and deceptive practice” contained in clause (1) of s.2(1)(r) that pertains to unfair trade practice in the promotion of goods and services – Nor does it make any false statement or intend to mislead the viewers – Furthermore, the burden is on the complainant to produce cogent evidence that proves unfair trade practice but nothing has been brought on record in the present case to show the same – Therefore, no case for unfair trade practice is made out in the present case. [Paras 14, 18] Case Law Cited Tata Press Ltd v. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited [1995] Supp. 2 SCR 467 : (1995) 5 SCC 139; Arulmighu Dhandayudhapaniswamy Thirukoil, Palani, Tamil Nadu v. Deptt. of Post Offices [2011] 10 SCR 43 : (2011) 13 SCC 220; Lakhanpal National Ltd v. MRTP Commission [1989] 2 SCR 979 : (1989) 3 SCC 251; KLM Royal Dutch Airlines v. Director General of Investigation and Registration [2008] 14 SCR 245 : (2009) 1 SCC 230; Ludhiana Improvement Trust, Ludhiana. v. Shakti Cooperative House Building Society Ltd [2009] 6 SCR 12 : (2009) 12 SCC 369 – referred to. Books and Periodicals Cited Halsbury’s Laws of England, Vol. 22 (5th edn, LexisNexis 2012), Para 240; Pollock and Mulla, The Indian Contract and Specific Relief Acts, Vol. I (14th edn, LexisNexis 2013), p. 42 – referred to. List of Acts Consumer Protection Act, 1986. [2024] 5 S.C.R. 145 Yash Raj Films Private Limited v. Afreen Fatima Zaidi & Anr. List of Keywords Consumer Protection; Promotional trailer; Contractual relationship; Unfair trade practice; Deficiency of service; Independent transaction; Offer; Promise; Right of claim; False statement; Misleading of viewers; clause (1) of section 2(1)(r) of Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Case Arising From CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION:
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.