The maximum retail price is supposed to make consumers better off. However, we learn that using fine prints of the law, retailers are selling above MRP and getting away
The laws related to maximum retail price (MRP) have been carelessly drafted that even shops which sell above MRP cannot be punished. It would seem that legal experts and bureaucrats who draft legislations are ignorant of the basics. More pertinently, it would seem that not printing the MRP on a packaged commodity would attract punishment, but selling above MRP would be allowed! Most people believe that the MRP printed on packaged commodities is beneficial to the consumers, as they cannot be sold above the MRP. It prevents exploitation of consumers. However, defective drafting of the laws has made MRP a meaningless number.
A recent judgment by the National Consumer Commission (NCC) has upheld the order of Bharuch (Gujarat) District Forum imposing a fine on Hotel Nyay Mandir for charging more than the MRP on some soft drinks. In another case, the Delhi State Consumer Commission imposed huge punitive damages of Rs50,000 on a restaurant serving mineral water to its customers at three times the MRP. While these decisions are welcome from the point of view of the consumer, unfortunately it goes against an order of the Supreme Court and is liable to be struck down.
The Supreme Court order (State of Himachal Pradesh Vs Associated Hotels of India, AIR 1972 SC 1131) given in 1972 makes MRP applicable only to retail sales, i.e. goods sold in shops. The Supreme Court held that such food and drinks can not be considered retail sales since they are always accompanied by service. So food and drinks consumed in hotels, restaurants or airplanes may be sold at prices above the MRP. However, it is different for shops, kirana stores, etc. They could charge more than MRP and still get away with it! Let us explore how and why.
The Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976, (the Act) only mandates that the price be printed on the package whereas the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (the Rules) go impermissibly further by stipulating that price charged can not exceed the printed price. The Act always supersedes the rules, and thus the latter would not have any bearing on the former, no matter how sensible or valid. The Act does not forbid selling packaged commodities for a price higher than the printed price much less specify the penalty for selling above the printed price.
According to the Section 39 of The Act, “No person shall—
(a) make, manufacture, pack, sell, or cause to be packed or sold; or
(b) distribute, deliver, or cause to be distributed or delivered; or
(c) offer, expose or possess for sale, any commodity in packaged form
to which this Part applies unless such package bears thereon or a label securely attached thereto a definite, plain and conspicuous declaration, as prescribed, of –
(i) the identity of the commodity in the package;
(ii) the net quantity, in terms of the standard unit of weight or measure, or the commodity in the package; (iii) where the commodity is packaged or sold by number, the accurate number of the commodity contained in the package;
(iv) the Unit sale price of the package;
(v) the sale price of the package.”
According to Section 23(2) of the rules, the retail sale of any packaged commodity at a price higher than the printed MRP is prohibited. It says, “No dealer or other person including manufacturer, packer, and wholesale dealer shall make any sale of any commodity in packed form at a price exceeding the retail sale price thereof.”
Thus it is clear that while the rules state that anything cannot be sold above MRP, sadly it cannot be enforced since the Act supersedes rules. Violation of the Act, I an MRP, would attract a fine of Rs5,000 or a prison term of five years with a fine. Section 63 of the Act states, “Whoever, in the course of inter-state trade or commerce, sells, distributes, delivers or otherwise transfers, or causes to be sold, distributed , delivered or otherwise transferred any commodity in a packaged form which does not conform to the provisions of this Act or any rule made there under, shall be punished with fine which may extend to Rs5,000, and, for the second or subsequent offence, with imprisonment for a term which may extend to five years and also with fine.”
One would expect that legal experts and bureaucrats would notice this and make the change accordingly. However, it seems they haven’t learnt anything and have just simply drafted a new act and rules without bothering to take cognizance of this glaring loophole.
The central government enacted the Legal Metrology Act 2009 (the New Act), which came into force on 1 April 2011 and replaced The Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976. The new act rationalizes the units for measurement to be used in India. The Act also specifies the metric system (metre, kilogram, etc.) to be used. It regulates the manufacture, sale and use of standard weights and measures.
According to Chapter V, of the Legal Metrology Act 2009, it appears that the non-conformity refers only to weight, number, etc. and not to the price. So there is no explicit prohibition of sale above the MRP. Several sections in this chapter devote to ‘weight’ or ‘number’ but not price. The only difference in this Act is the quantum of fine is much higher, at Rs25,000 instead of Rs5,000. Section 36 of the Legal Metrology Act states, “Whoever manufactures, packs, imports, sells, distributes, delivers or otherwise transfers, offers, exposes or possesses for sale, or causes to be sold, distributed, delivered or otherwise transferred, offered, exposed for sale any pre-packaged commodity which does not conform to the declarations on the package as provided in this Act, shall be punished with fine which may extend to twenty-five thousand rupees, for the second offence, with fine which may extend to Rs50,000 and for the subsequent offence, with fine which shall not be less than Rs50,000 but which may extend to Rs1 lakh or with imprisonment for a term which may extend to one year or with both.”
Similarly, according to Section 18(2) of The Legal Metrology (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 2011 (which replaced the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities Rules, 1977), it states that, “No retail dealer or other person including manufacturer, packer, importer and wholesale dealer shall make any sale of any commodity in packed form at a price exceeding the retail sale price thereof.”
Basically, the old and the new acts and rules are the more or less the same! It would seem that MRP is just a fiction. Anybody would be able to sell it above MRP.
In fact, there are several Supreme Court orders which prescribe the limits of rules made under an Act. They all say that Rules cannot extend the boundaries of the Act under which they have been made (e.g. Bharathidasan University Vs All-India Council for Technical Education, (2001) 8 SCC 767). They should have included the prohibition of charging a price higher than the printed price in the Act itself and not just in the rules. Unless parliament fixes this lacuna, MRP will continue to remain a paper tiger and not benefit any consumer.
Inside story of the National Stock Exchange’s amazing success, leading to hubris, regulatory capture and algo scam

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
1-year online access to the magazine articles published during the subscription period.
Access is given for all articles published during the week (starting Monday) your subscription starts. For example, if you subscribe on Wednesday, you will have access to articles uploaded from Monday of that week.
This means access to other articles (outside the subscription period) are not included.
Articles outside the subscription period can be bought separately for a small price per article.

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
30-day online access to the magazine articles published during the subscription period.
Access is given for all articles published during the week (starting Monday) your subscription starts. For example, if you subscribe on Wednesday, you will have access to articles uploaded from Monday of that week.
This means access to other articles (outside the subscription period) are not included.
Articles outside the subscription period can be bought separately for a small price per article.

Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance.
Complete access to Moneylife archives since inception ( till the date of your subscription )

When I came to know of senior discount, very reluctantly, I was offered a 5% discount. As it is on branded drugs which are more expensive than generic (which the shop keeper won't offer, unless one demands it), the manufacturers give trade discounts, which may go as high as 30%.
Public are not aware of this discount system. Why not the authorities make a new ruling that all the MRP prices mentioned in the packages are also SUBJECT to say 10% senior discounts?
Thanks,
uttam
What is a law if it’s not made use of ? As Anada Ramdas suggest, the media should be used to bring up the ongoing saga as in the end it’s the common man who bear the pain. It’s not worth to suffer in silence.
I agree you cannot go to the consumer court for this, but somewhere you and I need to draw the line and put up the resistance to stop this fleecing by shopkeepers.
Actually the shop here in question is itself a milk depot of Jersey dairy. Even the guy who does door delivery charges a bit extra.
I will keep in mind the reciept part. The next time I go to the shop, I will insist on that.
What about chilling the soft drink or storing a medicine or a chocolate in a fridge? Can the shop charge more? Should the shop not charge more?
Now coming think of satchet revolution in items like Shampoo there weight does not matter it is pice like Re 1/- matters, sane is the case with tooth pastes meant for overnite use by bus and train travellers. so price related package does not imply company misleads the onsumer for that companies have high power prefixed be it detergent powder, bar or health drinks suffixed with 23 vitamins or 32 minerals etc
i conclude MRP is the biggest flaw rather retail price should be same all over the country (uniform tax should be levied at factory level, so that printing of price on package will have any meaning)
You are right, as my nearest Kirana stores charge me a "negligible" 50 paise extra for a litre of milk when I buy in an emergency situation.
As against this, my monthly provisions come from a Mahalaxmi Stores, just opposite to Nilgris supermarket, whose proprietor Suja gives me a "discount"
on the MRP in order to retain and expand his clientele. When I spoke to him, he said trade discount received gives him the opportunity to do so.
I suggest Aditya does a follow up article by speaking to consumer durable producers, as this will be just as educative.
The dairy parlour near my home sells a milk packet priced at 19 Rs at 22.5 Rs. Not to forget this is a state govt owned dairy.
The same quality packet of a private dairy priced at 22 is sold at 22.5. When I asked why this disparity - the reply that I got is that 19 Rs is the price for a white card holder.
I went to other shop where I had to buy a milk of lower qaulity due to non availability. Even that being priced at 17 Rs was sold at 18.5.
I lodged a complaint at the website of both state owned and private dairies. However I don't expect much from them as their feed back system itself was not working well.
I called up the private dairy's consumer cell. To my amusement the guy said since it is morning and the milk is fresh they charge the extra premium.
A consumer court is very near my house. But they charge 2000 Rs to hear a case. So much for a paltry 3.5 Rs difference. I wonder what should I do?
The manufacturer of Areated Water viz, Pepsico & Coke are selling the same identical pack of Coke Tin with MRP OF RS 20/- in general market, whereas the same pack with MRP of Rs 50/- is sold at Self service food joints like HALDIRAM etc. In such like cases when there is no extra service provided to the customer, why the customer is made to pay 250% above the normal price.
Pl place the said fact to the learned Court,Law makers & manufacturers.
P.K.KALRA
Their ad quote the price as 8, but no retailer sells for 8. Everyone charges 10.