2008 AIR SCW 8296 ::2009 (1) AIR Bom R 624 ::2009 CLC 1 ::(2009) 1 WLC(SC)CVL 39 ::(2008) 87 CorLA 187 ::2009 (1) SCC 230 ::(2008) 13 Scale 514 ::2009 (74) ALR SOC 3 (SC) ::(2013) 4 CPR 685 ::(2008) 4 CPJ 18 ::(2008) 146 ComCas 421 ::(2009) 2 Mad LJ 1077 ::(2008) 4 All WC 4028 ::(2008) 72 AllIndCas 234 (SC)

Supreme Court Of India

Hon'ble Judge(s): Tarun Chatterjee, Mukundakam Sharma , JJ

Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act (54 of 1969) , S.36A(ii), S.36A(iv), S.36A(vi)— Unfair trade practice "and deficient service" - Distinction - No allegation of any false and misleading representation nor there was any proof to that effect - Finding by Commission that appellant was guilty of unfair trade practice - Erroneous - Order of Commission directing appellant that he would in future cease and desist from unfair trade practice of providing deficient service - Liable to be set aside. Holding the person guilty of unfair trade practice is not equal to holding a person guilty of providing deficient service. Element of unfair trade practice definitely stands at a higher and onerous platform than the deficient service. For making out a case of unfair trade practice an element is involved to the extent of making false and misleading statement and representation and in order to make a case of unfair trade practice such ingredients, which are part and parcel of the concept of unfair trade practice has to be alleged and must be proved and established.(Para 16) Where the parcels booked for carriage by complainant were missing and could not be delivered by appellant-Airlines to the addressee, and, they were found and delivered subsequently by the appellant, however, alleging that due to delay in delivering ....