BEFORE THE A.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION:HYDERABAD.
F.A.No.633/2008 AGAINST C.C.No.28/2007, DISTRICT FORUM, MEDAK AT SANGA REDDY.
Between:
Dr.S.Balakishan, S/o.Balaiah (late)
Village Rangampet, Mandal Kolcharam,
District Medak-502 381. Appellant/
Complainant
And
1. G.RajKumar (Rachappa)
Sri Chamundeshwari Tiffin Centre & Cooldrinks,
Main Road, Village Rangampet, mandal Kolcharam,
District Medak-502 381.
2. Mandalam Thums Up dealership
Pavudala Bhikshapathi, S/o.Pentaiah,
Village Pothamshettypally Chowrasta
Mandal Kolcharam-502 381, District Medak.
3. Main Thums Up dealership Medak,
Hanmanth Reddy, S/o.Siddiram Reddy,
Village Medak town, Mandal Medak,
District Medak.
4. Manufactured by Hindustan Coca Cola
Beweries Private Limited
Vilage Ameernapur, District Medak-500 032.
5. Under the authority of the Coca-cola company,
Koka Kola plaza, Atlanta, G.A.30313, U.S.A.,
Consumer Helpline 1800-180-2653,
E.mail.India Helpline @ apac.ko.com.
6. Hero Mahesh, S/o.Sri Natashekara Krishna Garu,
C/o.Hindustan Coca-cola Beweries Private Limited
44-69, Moulali, Hyderabad-500 040. ..Respondents/
Opp.parties
For the Appellant: Party in person.
For the Respondents: M/s.C.R.Sridharan-R4.
QUORUM: THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.APPA RAO, PRESIDENT
AND
SMT.M.SHREESHA, MEMBER
MONDAY, THE TWENTIETH DAY OF OCTOBER
TWO THOUSAND EIGHT.
ORAL ORDER: (Per Smt.M.Shreesha, Hon’ble Member.)
***
Aggrieved by the order in C.C.No.28/2007 on the file of District Forum, Medak at Sangareddy, the complainant preferred this appeal.
The brief facts as set out in the complaint are that the complainant attracted by the advertisement of Thums Up cool drinks, that anybody can win a gold coin which would be delivered by cine hero, Mahesh Babu, if they found a nine digit number 143220385 under the crown of thums up bottle and being a fan of cine hero, Mahesh Babu purchased two bottles of thums up on 22-5-2007 and found the nine digit number under the crown of one of the bottles and informed the same to the opposite party. On the same day evening, he received a telephone call that he won the contest and his address was noted and in the newspaper dated 25-5-2007, the complainant’s name was shown amongst the winners of the contest. When the complainant asked opposite party No.1 as to when the coin will be delivered, he was directed to approach opposite party No.2 who in turn directed him to approach opposite party No.3 to receive information. The complainant has not received any information with regard to delivery of the gold coin, hence he approached the District Forum seeking direction to opposite parties to pay Rs.1,00,000/- towards damages and other costs.
Opposite parties 1 to 3, 5 and 6 though received notices did not choose to appear before the District Forum.
Opposite party No.4 filed counter stating that under consumer promotion scheme for thums up brand products from 1-5-2007 to 30-5-2007, a winner was selected for every one hour and the consumer has to inform the code number printed under the crown. Opposite party No.4 admits that these coins would be handed over to the winners through Mahesh Babu, cine hero, who is brand ambassador of thums up brand. Opposite party No.4 submitted that they conducted a prize distribution ceremony on 17-5-2007 at IMAX theatre, Hyderabad and on 25-6-2007 at Shilpa Kala Vedika, Hyderabad and the winners received gold coins through Mahesh Babu. On 24-6-2007, opposite party No.4 contacted all winners through telephone and informed them about the prize distribution ceremony to be conducted on 25-6-2007. Opposite party No.4 submitted that they tried to contact the complainant from 12 noon to 7 P.M. on 24-6-2007 but there was no response. Opposite party No.4 submitted that they are ready and willing to handover the gold coin whenever the cine hero Mahesh Babu gives time for prize distribution to complainant and the complainant will be intimated to the address shown in the complaint and hence they submit that there is no deficiency of service on their behalf.
The District Forum based on the evidence adduced i.e. Exs.A1 to A5 and Ex.B1 allowed the complaint directing opposite parties 1 to 5 to arrange delivery of the gold coin to the complainant within four months failing which they are jointly and severally liable to pay Rs.10,000/- towards damages in addition to the gold coin. Opposite parties 1 to 5 were further directed to pay costs of Rs.1,000/-.
Aggrieved by the said order, the complainant preferred this appeal.
We have perused the material on record. It is not in dispute that the complainant had won the contest floated by respondents’ company wherein he was to receive gold coin from cine hero, Mahesh Babu. The appellant, party in person was present before this Commission and submitted that he was not informed of the prize distribution ceremony on 25-6-2007 and therefore could not collect the coin from cine hero, Mahesh Babu. He submits that he is a fan of the said hero and participated in the said contest only to receive the coin from Mahesh Babu. The learned counsel for respondent/opposite party No.4 submitted that they had already deposited the gold coin before the District Forum to prove their bonafides and that the complainant could receive the gold coin in the next prize distribution programme. The District Forum observed that in the absence of any proof that the opposite parties tried to contact the complainant to attend the prize distribution programme on 25-6-2007, there is deficiency of service on behalf of opposite parties 1 to 5 and directed them to pay Rs.10,000/- if the gold coin is not delivered to the complainant within four months.
This Commission directed the respondent No.4 to fix a date and deliver the gold coin through cine hero, Mahesh Babu to the party in person. The learned counsel for the respondent submitted that Sri Mahesh Babu had given an appointment on 15-9-2008 at around 3.00 p.m. and accordingly this was communicated to the appellant by telephone on 12-9-2008 at around 1.00 p.m. to be present on 15-9-2008 at their Moula-Ali Office around 2.30 p.m. and a telegram was also sent to the appellant. When the appellant, party in person was informed at around 2.30 p.m. once again 12-9-2008 for his confirmation, he demanded that a car be sent to his residence and when this was denied, he requested for a pick up from Balanagar Bus Stop at 3.30 p.m. The learned counsel for the respondent in his affidavit submitted that they did not receive a call till 2.00 p.m. on 15th September, and when they tried to contact him on his cell phone, they did not receive any response. When the company representative suggested to the appellant to confirm his time and final arrangements for receiving the gold coin will be made, he did not turn up.
The party in person submitted before this Commission that he received a phone call from the company representative on 13-9-2008 that the meeting would be on 15-9-2008 but he informed them that he had pooja in his house and he would not be able to attend the function on that day. He denied that he demanded that they should send a car to pick him up but he admitted that the company representatives without his knowledge had sent a car to his residence on 15-9-2008 but he unfortunately could not attend the function since he had prior commitment and he had already informed to respondent on 13-9-2008 itself when they made a phone call to him and therefore, they ought not to have fixed the meeting with cine hero on 15-9-2008 and compelled him to come by sending a car when he informed them categorically that the said day was not convenient for meeting because of the religious ceremony in his house.
This matter was once again posted to 20-10-2008 i.e. today for orders and the
learned counsel for the respondent submitted that he would inform this Commission the date on which cine hero, Mahesh Babu would be available to deliver the gold coin to the appellant/party in person. There is no representation from the respondent counsel. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances i.e. attempts have been made by the respondent in trying to deliver the gold coin through Mahesh Babu, the appellant’s prayer that the respondents’ company is cheating the consumers and that they have to be punished heavily with damages of Rs.1,00,000/- is unsustainable from any point of view on the ground that the documentary evidence filed by the respondent counsel proves that sincere efforts were made by them on 12th and 13th September, 2008 to inform the appellant about the distribution of gold coin by Mahesh Babu on 15-9-2008 and they admittedly also sent a car to his residence to assist the appellant. Therefore, we see no substantial reasons for the appellant to seek enhancement of compensation to Rs.1,00,000/-. It is pertinent to note that the respondents did not prefer any appeal and in the light of the present circumstances and in the absence of any date given by the respondent counsel, this Commission feels that it is just and proper to fix the date as 14.11.2008 and the appellant should be present before this Commission on that day at 11.00 a.m The respondent’s counsel is directed to collect the gold coin from the Registrar of this Commission on 14-11-2008 at 11.00 a.m. in the presence of the appellant, party in person, and the respondent counsel, shall inform the appellant, the venue where the Gold coin will be delivered by cine Hero, Mahesh Babu, while confirming the other aspects of the order of the District Forum.
With the above observations, this appeal is disposed of.
PRESIDENT MEMBER.
Dated 20-10-2008
