Back
DELHI STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION, NEW DELHI
N.P. KAUSHIK, J.
Karishma – Appellant
Versus
Pepsi Co. India Holding Pvt. Ltd. and Another – Respondents
Complaint Case No. 32 of 2011
Decided On : 03-10-2018
Unfair Trade Practice - Prize Winning Competition - Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Section 2(1)(r), Section 2(1)(o), Section 2(1)(g), Section 2(1)(d), Section 2(1)(f), Section 2(1)(r), Section 2(1)(n), Section 2(1)(t), Section 2(1)(m), Section 2(1)(i), Section 2(1)(k), Section 2(1)(l), Section 2(1)(e), Section 2(1)(j), Section 2(1)(zg), Section 2(1)(zb), Section 2(1)(za), Section 2(1)(z), Section 2(1)(y), Section 2(1)(w), Section 2(1)(v), Section 2(1)(u), Section 2(1)(s), Section 2(1)(q), Section 2(1)(p), Section 2(1)(h), Section 2(1)(c), Section 2(1)(b), Section 2(1)(a), Section 2(1)(n), Section 2(1)(t), Section 2(1)(m), Section 2(1)(i), Section 2(1)(k), Section 2(1)(l), Section 2(1)(e), Section 2(1)(j), Section 2(1)(zg), Section 2(1)(zb), Section 2(1)(za), Section 2(1)(z), Section 2(1)(y), Section 2(1)(w), Section 2(1)(v), Section 2(1)(u), Section 2(1)(s), Section 2(1)(q), Section 2(1)(p), Section 2(1)(h), Section 2(1)(c), Section 2(1)(b), Section 2(1)(a) - The court discussed the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, and its various sections, including the definition of unfair trade practice, consumer, deficiency, goods, service, and unfair contract. The court emphasized the burden of proof on the OPs to disprove the complainant's case and highlighted the need for transparency and genuineness in prize-winning competitions. The judgment reflects the court's application of consumer protection laws to address unfair trade practices and protect consumers' rights.
Fact of the Case:
The complainant participated in a prize-winning competition organized by the OPs and received a message declaring her as the winner of a Rs. 50 lakh prize. However, the OPs denied sending the message and alleged that the complainant fabricated it to defraud them. The OPs claimed that another participant was declared the winner and awarded Rs. 35 lakh. The complainant filed a complaint seeking the prize money along with interest, compensation, and litigation charges.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the complainant genuinely received the message declaring her as the winner and held the OPs responsible for unfair trade practices. The court directed the OPs to pay the complainant Rs. 50,00,000 along with interest, compensation, and litigation charges within 30 days. Additionally, the court ordered the OPs to deposit the awarded amount in the complainant's bank account and release Rs. 5 lakh to the complainant for immediate access.
Issues: The crucial issue was whether the message received by the complainant declaring her as the winner was genuine, and whether the OPs engaged in unfair trade practices by denying the prize to the complainant.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the burden of proof on the OPs to disprove the complainant's claim and highlighted the need for transparency and genuineness in prize-winning competitions. The court also considered the conduct of the OPs, including their failure to respond to the complainant's legal notice and their lack of evidence to support their claims.
Final Decision: The court held the OPs liable for unfair trade practices and directed them to pay the complainant the prize money along with interest, compensation, and litigation charges. The court also ordered the OPs to deposit the awarded amount in the complainant's bank account and release Rs. 5 lakh to the complainant for immediate access.
ORDER :
1. Complainant Ms. Karishma while a minor filed the present complaint through her father Sh. Lachi Chand. She attained the age of majority during the pendency of the present complaint, her date of birth being 8.8.1995. The complaint is treated to have been prosecuted by her in her individual capacity as complainant after she attained the age of majority. Complaint is directed against Pepsi Co. India Holding Pvt. Ltd., Global Business Park, Tower-A, 4 th Floor, Mehrauli-Gurgaon Road-122002 (in short OP1) and Pepsi Foods Pvt. Ltd., 3B, DLF Corporate Park, Phase-III, ‘S’ Block, Qutub Enclave, Gurgaon-122002 (in short OP2) claiming an amount of Rs. 50 lakh alongiwth interest @ 18% per annum. Compensation to the tune of Rs. 10,000 and litigation charges of the same amount have also been prayed for.
2. In brief, OP1 came up with a unique online game competition “Pepsi Youngistan Ka Wow” during Indian Premium League-Season 3, Cricket Tournament in March 2010. Film Actor Sh. Sanjay Dutt played as game master challenging another film actor Sh. Ranbir Kapoor. Participants who were TV audience were required to help the actor Sh. Ranbir Kapoor by sending their answers through SMS at mobile No. 9327272727 to the puzzles thrown by the actor Sh. Sanjay Dutt. Game was spread over 4 levels and the winner as per performance was to be given the grand prize of Rs. 50 lakh.
3. Rules of the game were that the first 35,000 participants submitting correct answers at any given level would win free mobile talktime worth Rs. 50. Participants submitting correct answers beyond first 35,000 entries would win a song downloaded from Pepsi Music Store. Participants giving correct answers across level 1, 2 & 3 were required to answer a tie-breaker question by way of a slogan/ situation. Winner was to be selected on the basis of the best answer as judged by the Actor Sh. Ranbir Kapoor. A prize of Rs. 50 lakh was fixed for such a winner. Contest was valid from 25.3.2010 to 25.4.2010. Rules of the game were also uploaded on the internet.
4. Complainant participated in the abovesaid game and gave correct answers to levels 1, 2 and 3 held on 3.4.2010, 8.4.2010 and 17.4.2010 respectively. She used her mobile No. 9278265357 for this purpose. After qualifying these 3 stages, complainant participated in the tie-breaking session on 21.4.2010. On 26.4.2010 she received a message from “TM – The Game”, reading, “Karishma nay dikha dia youngistan ka wow winner of the Pepsi the game and the award prize of Rs. 50 lakh.”
5. Upon receiving the abovesaid message, complainant contacted Mr. Namit Chawla working as lawyer for OP1 who asked the complainant to forward the winning message received by her on 26.4.2010 on his mobile No. 9971955445. Complainant forwarded the winning message to the mobile No. of Sh. Namit Chawla. On 27.4.2010, complainant received a message from Mr. Namit Chawla reading, “Congratulations to your winning our IPL.”
6. Complainant further submitted that in June 2010, a lady named Ms. Neha accompanied by two more persons came to her house and saw the winning message on her mobile phone. She also told the complainant that the complainant was the winner of the “Youngistan ka wow the game.” They assured her that the prize money would be given to her within 3 days. Before leaving, these persons took from the complainant her email ID.
7. After receiving no response within 3 days, complainant contacted Ms. Neha on her mobile No. 9953732091. Ms. Neha replied that she was a college student and not working with OP1. Now the complainant accompanied by her parents went to OP1’s office in August 2010. There one Mr. Siddharth told them that they would check the whole thing once again and called them for the next day. No response was received. Parents of the complainant contacted Mr. Siddharth on his mobile No. 9560494646. Mr. Siddharth threatened the parents of the complainant and stated that they should not embarrass them otherwise it would be bad for their daughter.
8.
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
