Back
2010(1) CPR 209
KERALA STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
M.V. Viswanathan, Judicial Member and M.K. Abdulla Sona, Member
Sri. Sachidanandan G. –Complainant
versus
Coca Cola India Ltd.
and Ors. –Opposite Parties
OP. No. 144 of 1999
Decided on 23-04-2009
r/w Section 36(1)(iv) of MRTP Act, 1969—Unfair trade practice—Refusal to give price (Car) to winner by OP Beverage company—Complainant collected prize winning caps of Thums Up Bottles with liners therein and he forwarded the same to address as shown in advertisement and said articles were accepted by OP—Complainant established his case regarding his eligibility and right to get Tata Safari Car—Mere fact that complainant was running a cool bar cannot taken as a ground to hold that he was a dealer or supplier of Thumps Up Bottles—Similarly only because complainant forwarded entry by speed post instead of ordinary post cannot be taken as a ground to hold that he is not entitled to get prize—Attitude and method adopted by OPs amount to unfair trade practice—OPs directed to deliver the car or in alternative to pay Rs. 8,00,000 to complainant with cost of Rs.1,000 with 9 % default interest. (Paras 7 to 15 and 17)
(B) Consumer Protection Act, 1986—Section 2(1)(d) —Consumer—On purchase of soft drinks nobody will ask for any cash memo or cash bill—No seller or retailer of soft drinks would give cash memo for sale of such soft drinks—Mere non-production of cash memo for purchase of soft drinks cannot be taken as a ground to hold that complainant had not purchased soft drinks for his consumption—Complainant is a Consumer as defined under Section 2(1)(d). (Para 10)
Result: Complaint allowed.
M.V. Viswanathan, Judicial Member—This is a complaint filed under Section 18 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. The case of the complainant is as follows:
The first opposite party Coca Cola India Limited introduced the prize winning scheme by the name “Thumps-Up Thunder Gear” and the said scheme was advertised as part of their sales promotion of their soft drinks product “Thumps-Up”. The aforesaid prize scheme offered various prizes such as Tata Safari Car, woodland jacket, waist pouch, thunder jeans, woodland T-shirt woodland shoes etc. As per the advertisement, any person who collects liners attached to the caps (crown) of the Thumps-Up bottles with the alphabets T,H, U, M, S, U.P. plus the liner containing the visual or picture of the prize would be awarded the said prize shown in the liner. The said offer was valid from 15th December, 1998 to 15th February,1999 and that the prizes will be awarded on first come first served basis. The said offer was later extended to 28th February, 1999. The complainant collected the caps and liners of Thumps-Up bottles containing the alphabets “Thumps -Up” and also collected the picture of a car printed on a liner containing in the “Thumps-UP “ cap. The complainant sent such liners to the address mentioned in the advertisement as PB No. 13 Kalkaji New Delhi-19. The complainant sent the said liners on 15.2.1999 by speed post and the same was received by the opposite parties on 16.2.1999. After receiving the prize winning liners, the opposite parties kept mum without sending any reply to the same. The complainant sent several remainders to the opposite parties. However, the opposite parties did not respond. The aforesaid action or inaction on the part of the opposite parties would amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. Hence the complaint is filed for directing the opposite parties to give a Tata Safari Car and to award the entire cost of the proceedings.
2. The opposite parties 1 and 3 filed joint written version (reply) contending as follows:
The complainant is not a consumer within the meaning of the term consumer as defined under Section 2(1)(d) of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. There is absolutely no proof of the alleged sale and purchase of the bottles of Thumps-Up. No cash memo has been field b the complainant purchased the Thumps Up bottles for resale purpose. The complainant is running a cool bar and had collected caps/crowns of Thumps Up bottles while selling Thumps Up bottles to his customers. Since the complainant purchased the Thumps Up bottle for resale and for commercial purpose, the complainant cannot claim status of a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act. The complainant has no cause of action to file the present complaint. According to the complainant he sent the liners in question by speed post, whereas as per the prize scheme the liners are to be sent by ordinary post. So, the complainant is not entitled to participate in the prize scheme. The complaint is not entitled to participate in the prize scheme. The complaint is filed with mala fide intentions to harass the opposite parties. The complaint is bad for mis-joinder of parties. The opposite parties 2 and 3 are impleaded with ulterior motive. No allegation is made against the opposite parties 2 and 3. There was no cause of action against the opposite parties 2 and 3. No relief can be granted against the opposite parties 2 and 3. The first opposite party conducted the prize scheme according to the terms and conditions published in the advertisement. The entries were shown and prize given in accordance with the terms and conditions stated in the advertisement appeared in the leading new papers in the country. As per the terms and conditions of the prize scheme an entries sent by ordinary post up to 28.2.19999 were applicable and entertained as the same was sent by speed post. The allegation that the complainant sent the entries such as the liners to the opposite parties is denied.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
