ASSOCIATION Vs. HINDUSTAN LEVER LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order disposes of the application filed by the respondent in the above case under Regulation 65 (1) (j) of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Commission Regulations, 1991 (for brief the Regulations) praying for discharge of the Notice of Enquiry (NOE) issued against it on 9.10.1997.

(2.) The facts leading to issue of the NOE against the respondent may be briefly recalled. The applicants/complainants approached this Commission with a complaint charging the respondent with adoption and indulgence in unfair trade practices within the meaning of Sec.36-A of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (for brief the Act ). The applicants/complainants alleged that the respondent was showing TV commercials with respect to its product by the name Kisan Annapurna Salt. The respondent's claim was with respect to its iodized content in the correct proportion and that it was helpful for the mental development of children. It also transpired from the complaint that the price of 1 kg. pack of Kisan Annapurna Salt was Rs.6/- while salt with same iodine content manufactured by others was available at the price ranging from Rs.2 to 4.

(3.) While entertaining the complaint and the interim relief application filed alongwith it the Commission passed an ex parte ad interim order on the 19th September, 1997 directing the respondent not to allow display of TV commercials with a campaign that Kisan Annapurna Salt helps development of mental faculty of children. Noting that the respondent had aired a new TV commercial on the same lines as before, the applicants/complainants also filed an application under Sec.13-B of the Act to take action in contempt against the respondents. The applicant/complainant also filed another application under Sec.12-A of the Act for grant of injunction against airing of TV commercials by the respondent in the modified form.