News

Iconic `Old Monk' rum is just `rum-flavoured spirit,' food safety authority tells court

Old Monk cannot be sold as rum, FSSAI tells Bombay High Court

Dhanam News Desk

The iconic Old Monk brand is at the centre of a regulatory dispute over what can legally be called “rum” in India. The Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) has told the Bombay High Court that certain Old Monk variants cannot be marketed as rum because they are made using neutral spirit and rum flavouring.

The regulator said the products could instead be sold as “rum-flavoured spirit”. The company has now submitted revised labels to the court, while FSSAI has sought more time to examine them. The case will be heard again on September 11.

What FSSAI is objecting to

According to the food regulator, the key issue is not simply how the beverage is labelled but what the product actually contains.

FSSAI’s position is that:

  • The disputed beverage is made using neutral spirit and rum flavouring.

  • Such a product cannot be marketed as “rum”.

  • It can instead be described as a “rum-flavoured spirit”.

  • The regulator says standardised alcoholic beverages must retain their characteristic taste and aroma.

The dispute is based on laboratory tests that FSSAI says detected external artificial or nature-identical flavouring substances in certain alcoholic beverages.

Old Monk submits revised labels

The company has submitted modified labels following directions from the Bombay High Court.

At an earlier hearing, the company agreed to remove the words “7 years old blended” from the packaging.

The court had expressed concern that consumers could interpret the wording as meaning that the rum had been aged for seven years. It also questioned the use of very small text on the label, observing that consumers may not be able to read it.

The court has directed:

  • The company to submit revised labels.

  • FSSAI to specify the information and labelling requirements.

  • The state excise department to examine the revised packaging.

  • Authorities to expedite the approval process.

₹1 crore daily loss claimed

The regulatory action has also had a significant financial impact on the company. The company’s senior counsel told the court that it had suffered losses of around ₹1 crore a day during the 120 days the ban had been in force.

The dispute therefore has implications beyond packaging. Any requirement to change how established alcoholic beverage brands are described and marketed could have a direct impact on sales and distribution.

Wider liquor industry under scrutiny

Old Monk is not the only brand caught up in FSSAI’s action.

The regulator had also prohibited the sale of certain variants of:

  • McDowell's No. 1 Rum

  • Antiquity Blue Whisky

  • Royal Challenge Whisky

  • Bagpiper Deluxe Whisky

  • Old Cask Deluxe XXX Rum

United Spirits, which faced a similar dispute, withdrew its case on August 24 after agreeing to comply with FSSAI’s directions.

Diageo and other liquor companies have agreed to either remove the disputed flavouring agents or modify product labels, according to reports. The changes are expected to be made without altering the original formulation of the beverages.

Why the definition of rum matters

FSSAI has cited the Food Safety and Standards (Alcoholic Beverages) Regulations, 2018, which prescribe standards for alcoholic beverages such as rum and whisky.

The regulator’s argument is that adding a “rum flavour” to a product marketed as rum, or a “whisky flavour” to whisky, could amount to misrepresentation if the beverage does not otherwise meet the prescribed characteristics of the standardised product.

For Old Monk, the immediate question is therefore whether its disputed variants can continue to carry the “rum” label or will have to be marketed under a different description.

The Bombay High Court’s next hearing on September 11 could provide further clarity on the labelling requirements and the future sale of the affected variants.

SCROLL FOR NEXT