Petitioner had filed a complaint before the District Forum alleging that the respondent M/s Coca Cola India Pvt. Ltd. had floated a scheme under which if somebody drinks its softdrinks and if he finds some prize printed under the bottle, he would be entitled to           that prize.  Complainant allegedly bought the softdrink from Durga

-2-

Mishthan Bhandar at Agra for Rs.8/- and found under the crown the image of Honda City Card.  He approached the petitioner for delivery of Honda City Car, but the respondent did not give the prize to him.  Aggrieved by this, petitioner filed a complaint before the District Forum.

          The District Forum allowed the complaint and directed the respondent to either give the Honda City Car or its equivalent value prevailing at that time.

          Aggrieved by this, respondent filed an appeal before the State Commission.  The State Commission vide its impugned order allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the District Forum.  It was held that the petitioner had not complied with the terms and conditions of the scheme; that according to the scheme, the entries upto 26.10.1998 could be entertained and the prize was to be disbursed on First Come First Serve basis; that in the complaint, the petitioner failed to specify that there has been any compliance of the terms and conditions of the scheme.

          Counsel for the parties have been heard.

-3-

          Learned counsel for the petitioner at the outset submitted that the appeal before the State Commission was filed with a delay of nearly one month; that the State Commission has erred by not adverting to this fact and proceeding to decide the appeal without condoning the delay in filing the appeal.

          Parties have not produced the court orders which may have been passed from time to time.  At the time of admission, the State Commission may have condoned the delay and that is why the same may not have been dealt with in the main order.  The submission, which is made for the first time before us regarding condonation of delay, has not been raised or at least has not been noticed by the State Commission in its order.  Otherwise also, the State Commission has proceeded to decide the appeal on merits.  It would be deemed as if the State Commission had condoned the delay.

          In the complaint, petitioner has not specified the date on which he had purchased the coca cola bottle from Durga Mishthan Bhandar.  Neither any receipt nor any evidence has been produced to show  that he had purchased the bottle of coca cola from Durga Mishthan

-4-

Bhandar.  As against this, counsel for the respondent has drawn our attention to the cash memo regarding sale of one bottle of coca cola by Agra Sales and Marketing Private Limited dtd. 26.3.1999 which was produced by the petitioner before the District Forum.  The said cash memo bears the signatures of the petitioner and according to this document, this bottle had been purchased by the complainant on 26.3.1999.  By that time, the scheme had already closed as the last date for sending the entries for prize was 26.10.1998.  Counsel for the petitioner states that he had filed this document before the District Forum to show the relationship of Agra Sales and Marketing Private Limited with M/s Coca Cola Company, respondent no. 1.   It was not the same bottle from which he found the crown under which image of Honda City was found.

          We agree with the view taken by the State Commission that the petitioner had failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the scheme.  The only document which we have regarding the purchase of the bottle by the petitioner is dated 26.3.1999 which the petitioner himself had produced.  There is no other document on record to show

-5-

that the petitioner had purchased any other bottle from any other dealer prior to the closure of the scheme. 

            For the reasons stated above, we do not find any infirmity in the order passed by the State Commission.  Revision petition is dismissed.  no costs.