Constitution of India, 1950
Article 21—Right to choice food—Prohibition on carrying food and beverages from outside into the precincts of the movie hall—Movie goers are not compelled to buy food at the cinema hall—Whether or not to purchase food or beverages after gaining admission to the cinema hall is entirely within the choice of the movie goer—Viewers visit cinema halls for the purpose of entertainment—Transaction of purchasing a ticket permits them to view the movie they have opted to watch—If the food and beverages on sale at the movie hall are not to their taste, they are free to refrain from purchasing them—In this way, they are not being prevented from exercising their right to choice of food.
[Para 26]
Article 19(1)(g)—Exercise of the right of cinema owners to carry on a business or trade—Binding effect of terms and conditions imposed by cinema owners or other commercial entities—Terms and conditions imposed by cinema owners or other commercial entities cannot bind the consumer or the customer in every case—When one party has unequal bargaining power relative to the other party, any terms and conditions which are unreasonable may not be enforced as against the party with lower bargaining power—A contract (or a term in a contract) can be said to be unfair or unreasonable if it is one-sided or devoid of any commercial logic—Although theatre owners may unilaterally determine the conditions of entry into cinema hall, the condition imposed in this instance is not unfair, unreasonable or unconscionable—Movie goers are bound by the condition of entry determined by the theatre owners in the instant case i.e., the prohibition on carrying food and beverages from outside into the precincts of the movie hall.
Held : The condition of entry is imposed as a direct result of the exercise of the right of cinema owners to carry on a business or trade under Article 19(1)(g) of the Constitution of India. The commercial logic of prohibiting movie goers from carrying their own food to the cinema hall is to stimulate and boost a vital aspect of the business – the sale of food and beverages. If business owners are not permitted to determine the various facets of their business (in accordance with law), economic activity would come to a grinding halt. While movie goers may have no choice but to sign on the proverbial dotted line (and thereby not carry any food of their own into the theatre) in order to enter the cinema hall and watch a movie of their choice, this does not by itself render the condition of entry unfair, unreasonable or unconscionable.
Most businesses impose some or the other condition which the customer may find less than ideal. For instance, many private museums do not permit customers to take photographs of the objects on display. This is also true of many clothing boutiques or jewellery stores. Audience members are often banned from recording musical performances at concerts. Music festivals, much like movie theatres, do not permit attendees to carry their own food or beverages to the venue. Similar is the case with stand-up comedy shows or plays that are conducted in collaboration with eateries or bars. Although the customer is paying for a ticket to watch the music performance (or the stand- up act or the play, as the case may be), the essence of the business model is to provide a fillip to the revenue generated by another arm of the business. This being the case, movie goers are bound by the condition of entry determined by the theatre owners in the instant case i.e., the prohibition on carrying food and beverages from outside into the precincts of the movie hall.
[Para 29 & 31]
Article 226—Exercise of jurisdiction—Direction by High Court to the cinema hall owners not to prohibit movie goers from carrying eatables and beverages from outside within the precincts of a cinema hall—Appeal—Exercise of its jurisdiction was not consistent with provisions of enactments regulating movie thearters—Cinema hall is a private property of the owner of the hall—A prohibition on carrying food and beverages from outside into the precincts of the movie hall is not contrary to public interest, safety or welfare—Whether or not to watch a movie is entirely within the choice of viewers—If viewers seek to enter a cinema hall, they must abide by the terms and conditions subject to which entry is granted—Having reserved the right of admission, it is open to theatre owners to determine whether food from outside the precincts of the cinema hall should be permitted to be carried inside— High Court transgressed its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution by directing the cinema hall owners not to prohibit movie goers from carrying eatables and beverages from outside within the precincts of a cinema hall and by directing the state to enforce this direction to the cinema hall owners—Absent a statutory regulation which regulates the right to conduct the business of operating a cinema hall, the imposition of such a restraint would affect the legitimate rights of a theatre owner—Movie goers are bound by the condition of entry determined by the theatre owners in the instant case i.e., the prohibition on carrying food and beverages from outside into the precincts of the movie hall—Impugned judgment and order of High Court set aside—As for movie goers with chronic diseases who may have received dietary instructions from their doctors or who may otherwise be under dietary restrictions due to their medical condition, the cinema hall owners are requested to consider the requests from such movie goers on a case-by-case basis.
[Paras 22 to 28 & 34]