Emami Directed to Pay ₹15 Lakh in Compensation for 2013 Fairness Cream Dispute
In a significant ruling, Emami Ltd, a prominent personal care company, has been ordered by a Delhi district consumer dispute redressal commission to pay ₹15 lakh in damages over a 2013 complaint concerning its fairness cream, Fair and Handsome. The case was filed by Nikhil Jain, a resident of Rohini, Delhi, who alleged that the product’s advertising was misleading and amounted to unfair trade practices.
In a significant ruling, Emami Ltd, a prominent personal care company, has been ordered by a Delhi district consumer dispute redressal commission to pay ₹15 lakh in damages over a 2013 complaint concerning its fairness cream, Fair and Handsome. The case was filed by Nikhil Jain, a resident of Rohini, Delhi, who alleged that the product’s advertising was misleading and amounted to unfair trade practices.
The case dates back to October 2012 when Jain purchased the fairness cream, advertised to deliver visibly fairer skin within three weeks. However, after following the instructions on the packaging, Jain claimed he did not experience the promised results, leading him to file a complaint against Emami in 2013.
The commission’s ruling, issued on December 9, requires Emami to deposit ₹14.5 lakh in punitive damages into the State Consumer Welfare Funds Delhi account and pay ₹50,000 to Jain as compensation. In addition, Emami has been ordered to pay ₹10,000 in legal costs.
Emami defended the product, asserting that it was scientifically tested to protect men aged 16 to 35 from skin darkening caused by UV rays. The company also argued that the effectiveness of the cream depends on various factors, including proper usage, diet, exercise, and overall lifestyle. However, Jain contended that the product’s packaging lacked sufficient instructions and conditions for achieving the desired results.
The commission sided with Jain, stating that the packaging’s instructions were insufficient and misleading. It noted that the claim of fairer skin after regular use for three weeks was unrealistic without clarifying the need for other factors such as a healthy diet or lifestyle. The bench, consisting of President Inder Jeet Singh and Member Rashmi Bansal, found that Emami’s advertising misrepresented the product’s capabilities and engaged in unfair trade practices by making deceptive claims.
This decision is not the first ruling in this case. In 2015, an earlier bench of the commission had ruled in Jain’s favor, but Emami appealed, and the case was remanded for further adjudication with additional evidence. The consumer forum emphasized that average consumers could easily be misled by the product’s claims, leading to the conclusion that Emami’s actions constituted unfair trade practices.
The case is a notable example of the growing scrutiny faced by companies over misleading advertisements and false claims, particularly in the beauty and personal care industry.
Sources By Agencies
About The Author
