Maharashtra

StateCommission

A/10/1179

SHRI BALARAM S DUTTA - Complainant(s)

Versus

M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT LTD - Opp.Party(s)

IN PERSON

07 Feb 2013

ORDER

BEFORE THE HON'BLE STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL
COMMISSION, MAHARASHTRA, MUMBAI
 
First Appeal No. A/10/1179
(Arisen out of Order Dated 15/09/2010 in Case No. 129/2003 of District Additional DCF, Mumbai(Suburban))
 
1. SHRI BALARAM S DUTTA
FATIMABAI CHAWL 1 ST FLOOR ROOM NO 6 SARVODAYA NAGAR J M ROAD BHANDUP WEST MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Appellant(s)
Versus
1. M/S PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT LTD
SUNDER BAUG ESTATE SION TROMBAY ROAD DEONAR CHEMBUR MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
2. THE DIRECTOR, MRS TANUSHRI HEMA
PEPSICO INDIA HOLDING PVT LTD, SUNDER BAUG ESTATE, SION - TROMBAY ROAD DEONAR CHEMBUR MUMBAI
MUMBAI
MAHARASHTRA
...........Respondent(s)
 
BEFORE: 
 HON'BLE MR. S.R. Khanzode PRESIDING MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. Dhanraj Khamatkar Member
 
PRESENT:
Appellant present in person.
......for the Appellant
 
Adv.Geetanjali Kulkarni for the respondent No.1.
Respondent No.2 absent.
......for the Respondent
ORDER

(Per Shri S.R.Khanzode, Hon’ble Presiding Judicial Member)

 

(1)               Heard the parties on admission.  The consumer complaint pertains to the alleged deficiency in service on the part of the respondent/opponent for not honouring their own scheme and releasing prize amount to the complainant.  The forum rightly observed that since the scheme under which the complainant is claiming the prize was already over by the time he purchased the Pepsi cold-drink bottle and, therefore, since purchase is as per the closure of the scheme, dismissed the complaint.  When we invited attention of the complainant, who is appearing in person to this aspect, he failed to answer to the same but go one stating that once the prize is declared, he cannot be deprived of the same by the respondent company.  We are afraid; his such contention cannot be accepted.  Thus, we find no reason to take a different view than what is taken by the District Forum.  Therefore, finding the appeal devoid of any substance, we pass the following order.

 

ORDER

 

(1)     Appeal is not admitted and disposed off accordingly.

(2)     No order as to costs.

 

Pronounced on 7th February, 2013.

 

 
 
[HON'BLE MR. S.R. Khanzode]
PRESIDING MEMBER
 
[HON'BLE MR. Dhanraj Khamatkar]
Member

Consumer Court Lawyer

Best Law Firm for all your Consumer Court related cases.

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!
5.0 (615)

Bhanu Pratap

Featured Recomended
Highly recommended!

Experties

Consumer Court | Cheque Bounce | Civil Cases | Criminal Cases | Matrimonial Disputes

Phone Number

7982270319

Dedicated team of best lawyers for all your legal queries. Our lawyers can help you for you Consumer Court related cases at very affordable fee.