Karnataka High Court judgment on what construes ‘packaged commodities’ under the LMPC Rules

The declarations under the Legal Metrology Act, 2009 read with the Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 (‘LMPC Rules’) are applicable on a pre-packaged commodity.

Rule 2(l) of the LMPC Rules defines a ‘pre-packaged commodity’ to mean a commodity (without the purchaser being present) placed in a package of any nature, whether sealed or not, which has a pre-determined quantity.

The issue as to what constitutes a ‘pre-packaged commodity’ has been quite debatable under the Legal Metrology laws. Due to contrasting views of various Courts on the issue, the matter has become even more complicated. At present, disputes on this subject are pending before the Supreme Court for final disposal.

The decision of the Karnataka High Court in the matter of Kandukuri Garments v. Inspector of Legal Metrology, Criminal Petition No. 158/2018 rendered in April 2018, only adds to the complication.

In the instant case, the question involved was whether garments packed in a polythene cover after being sold at retail shops, would fall under the purview of LMPC Rules? The Hon’ble High Court referred to an Advisory dated December 12, 2016 wherein the Government had stated that ‘loose’ garments sold in retail stores were outside the purview of the LMPC Rules.

The Court while interpreting the dictionary meaning of the term ‘loose’, held that when a commodity is sold without a pre-package, it would fall outside the purview of the LMPC Rules. In cases where the commodity is pre-packaged for whatever reasons; it would come within the purview of the LMPC Rules.

NITYA Comments:

With due respect, the Hon’ble Court has failed to consider a fundamental point that provisions of the LMPC Rules are applicable in case of packages intended for retail sale and are applicable to a pre-packaged commodity only. It is notable that there is an existing jurisprudence (for instance muffins packed in a paper wrapper) wherein it has been held that when commodities are packed in a package for protection or safe transportation purposes, it would fall outside the purview of the LMPC Rules. To that extent, this judgment does not lay down the correct legal position. 

The above interpretation of the law by the Hon’ble Court can have far reaching implications on industries selling their products in packaged form. In the instant case, the polythene cover used was not intended for retail sale of the goods in packaged form at the first instance. It was only when the commodity (shirt) was sold to the customer, was it packed in the polythene cover. Notably, the Court in Para 14 has used the phrase ‘said commodity is pre-packaged for whatsoever reasons’; however, the Court failed to appreciate that in such cases (wherein commodity is put in a package for protection purposes), the commodity is post-packaged and not pre-packaged.  

Basis the above discussion, in our view, the above judgment is incorrect and can be challenged on merits before the proper forum.