Delhi consumer forum fines Emami Rs 15 lakh for ‘misleading ad’

The Central Delhi District Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission has fined Emami Ltd Rs 15 lakh for engaging in unfair trade practices through misleading advertisements for Fair and Handsome.

The ruling has come 11 years after a customer filed a complaint against the company, alleging that the fairness cream failed to deliver its promised results.
The complainant, who purchased the cream in 2013 for Rs 79, claimed that despite following the instructions on the packaging—applying the product twice daily after cleansing—he saw no improvement in his skin tone.

The consumer forum, led by President Inder Jeet Singh and member Rashmi Bansal, scrutinized the product's claims. It noted that the packaging and advertisements assured fairness within three weeks of regular use. However, the instructions omitted key factors that could influence results, such as the need for a balanced diet, exercise, or a healthy lifestyle.

Emami argued that the complainant failed to prove proper usage of the product. The company also introduced a peculiar claim that the cream was intended for healthy men aged 16–35, a condition not mentioned on the packaging.

The forum found this defence inadequate, stating that the company could not shift blame onto the consumer for incomplete instructions. "A reasonable customer could be misled into believing that following the limited instructions would guarantee fairness," the forum observed.

The forum ruled that Emami's marketing strategy constituted a misleading advertisement and an unfair trade practice. It ordered the company to withdraw all advertisements, packaging, and labels associated with Fair and Handsome that promote deceptive claims.

The court directed Emami to pay ₹14.5 lakh as punitive damages to the Delhi State Consumer Welfare Fund. Additionally, the complainant was awarded ₹50,000 for punitive damages and ₹10,000 to cover legal costs.

Highlighting the significance of punitive damages, the forum explained, “Punitive damages are assessed to deter companies from engaging in intolerant or deceptive behaviour. They serve as a reminder to reform defaulting practices and prevent similar wrongdoings in the future.”

When exchange4media reached out to Emami, their spokesperson stated, "This verdict pertains to a very old case and holds no relevance to our current products or brand communication. We intend to appeal the decision in a higher court."