9911796707
|
Home
Issues: Interpretation of the term "butter" under Rule A. 11.05 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act.
Analysis: 1. The judgment addresses the question of whether the term "butter" under Rule A. 11.05 includes butter prepared from curd. The court examines the relevant provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, which defines "adulterated" articles of food and empowers the Central Government to make rules regarding food standards. Rule A. 11.05 specifically defines butter as a product prepared exclusively from the milk or cream of cow or buffalo, with specific requirements for milk fat content and moisture levels. The court emphasizes that the focus is on the basic material used to make butter, not the process involved. 2. The argument presented by the petitioner is that curd is a milk product, not milk itself, and therefore butter prepared from curd should not fall under Rule A. 11.05. Reference is made to a previous case where it was held that butter made from curd does not meet the definition of butter under the rules. However, the court notes that the term "exclusively from milk or cream" in Rule A. 11.05 does not restrict the process of making butter, but rather the source material. It explains that curd is an intermediate product in butter production from milk and thus butter made from curd is also considered butter made from milk. 3. The court rejects the argument that the rules only apply to butter made from cream and not curd. It highlights that the legislative intent is to prevent the sale of adulterated butter, regardless of the process used in its preparation. The court emphasizes interpreting the rules in a manner that aligns with the legislative purpose and discourages any interpretation that would exclude common practices, such as making butter from curd, from regulatory oversight. The judgment concludes that Rule A. 11.05 encompasses butter prepared from curd, in addition to milk or cream, based on the ordinary meaning of the term "butter." 4. In contrast to a previous judgment, the court disagrees with the view that butter made from curd falls outside the scope of Rule A. 11.05. It asserts that the rule covers butter prepared from curd as well, considering curd as a milk product. The judgment affirms that the rule's language does not exclude butter made from curd and upholds that butter prepared from curd falls within the definition of butter under the Act. The court answers the referred question in the affirmative, stating that Rule A. 11.05 applies to butter prepared from curd, milk, or cream.
|
