Summary
A promotional song’s absence from the released film did not establish deficient entertainment service or unfair trade practice on this record. The trailer was not a contractual offer promising that song’s inclusion; buying a ticket was a separate transaction. The complainant also failed to establish a materially false or misleading representation with cogent evidence. Artistic promotional services require attention to creative discretion. The producer’s appeal was allowed and the adverse findings set aside.
Issues
- Whether the promotional trailer created an enforceable promise about the film’s contents.
- Whether omission of the promoted song constituted deficient service.
- Whether the complaint proved unfair trade practice independently of contract.
Provisions considered
- Sections 2(1)(d), 2(1)(o) and 2(1)(g), Consumer Protection Act, 1986A paying film viewer is a consumer of entertainment services, but the personal expectation that a promoted song would appear did not establish breach of a binding service obligation. (¶¶ 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14)
- Section 2(a), (b), (e) and (h), Indian Contract Act, 1872The unilateral promotional trailer was not an offer obtaining acceptance and did not become a promise or contract for inclusion of the song. Ticket purchase was independent. (¶¶ 12, 13, 14)
- Section 2(1)(r)(1), including clauses (ii) and (iv), Consumer Protection Act, 1986A materially false or misleading representation had to be established by cogent evidence; those ingredients were not proved here, with artistic discretion relevant to assessment. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
Held
- Payment for a cinema ticket makes the viewer a consumer of entertainment services. Nevertheless, deficiency cannot be inferred merely from the viewer’s expectation that a promotional song would be included in the film. The alleged failure must engage a legally relevant service obligation. (¶¶ 9, 10, 11, 12)
- Promotional trailers encourage ticket purchases but are not, in themselves, contractual offers or promises that all promotional material will form part of the film. This trailer created no enforceable obligation to play the song; the ticket transaction entitled the viewer to watch the film and was separate. (¶¶ 13, 14)
- Absence of a contract did not by itself dispose of the separate unfair-trade-practice issue. That claim required a false or misleading representation material to a reasonable person and supporting cogent evidence. None was shown here, so the statutory ingredients were not established. (¶¶ 15, 16, 17, 18)
- Promotional content can serve artistic and attention-generating purposes beyond literal product information. Assessment of representations concerning artistic services must account for creative discretion. This reasoning did not exclude genuinely deceptive advertising from regulation. (¶¶ 5, 6, 7, 19)
- The findings of deficient service and unfair trade practice were set aside and the producer’s appeal allowed; pending applications were disposed of. (¶¶ 20, 21)
Result
Producer’s appeal allowed; impugned findings of deficiency in service and unfair trade practice set aside. Pending applications disposed of.