BEFORE THE DISTRICT CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL FORUM-I, U.T. CHANDIGARH ======== Consumer Complaint No | : | 242 of 2010 | Date of Institution | ` | 16.04.2010 | Date of Decision | : | 06.04.2011 |
1. Deepak Kumar 2. Navtej Singh #3115, Sector 27-D, Chandigarh. ….…Complainants V E R S U S 1. Coca Cola India, Enkay Tower Udyog Vihar Phase-5, Gurgaon. 2. Bhatia Super, SCO No.475-76, Sector 35-B, Chandigarh. 3. Mr. Jaspal Singh Kandhari, Kandhari Beverages Ltd., Bottling Plant, Plant No.177-F, Industrial Area, Phase I, Chandigarh. ..…Opposite Parties CORAM: SH.RAJINDER SINGH GILL, PRESIDING MEMBER DR.(MRS) MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER Present: Complainant in person. Sh. Ashim Aggarwal, Adv. for OP-1 OP-2 exparte. Sh. Krishan Singla, Adv. for OP-3 PER RAJINDER SINGH GILL, PRESIDING MEMBER Succinctly put, the OPs gave advertisement in the TV that on purchase of 500 ml. pet bottle of Thums Up, the consumer would get a 9 digit unique code which was to be sent through SMS to 9099699699 and one could win Suzuki Motor cycle apart from a Suzuki motorcycle every hour. A Suzuki Hayabusa was also to be given in bumper prize. The scheme was valid till March 2010. Allured by the advertisement, the complainant purchased 20 bottles of 500 ml. of Thumps Up vide bill dated 3.7.2010 from Bhatia Super Market, Chandigarh and sent the unique No. through SMS at the number given in the scheme. When till 14.4.2010 they did not get anything, they got suspicious and asked about the working of the scheme run by the OPs but to no avail. Hence this complaint alleging that the aforesaid acts of the OPs amount to deficiency in service and unfair trade practice. 2. In their written reply OP-1 submitted that the list of prize winners in the “Thums Up Thunder Wheel Offer” has been under finalisation because in some cases the persons who had qualified for the prize did not complete the requisite documentation and efforts are made to expedite the completion of the final list of winners. It has been stated that in response to the communication of the complainants seeking certain clarification, the OP sent reply vide email dated 26.5.2010. It has been pleaded that no personnel of the OP is involved in the selection of winners and the procedure adopted for choosing the winners is fair which is conducted by an independent accredited and leading firm of Chartered Accounts who were appointed to ensure that the selection of prize winners is done in a fair manner. Denying all the material allegations of the complainant and pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on their part prayer for dismissal of the complaint has been made. 3. OP-2 did not appear despite due service, hence they were proceeded against exparte. 4. OP-3 in his separate written reply at the outset took preliminary objections inter alia that this Forum has no jurisdiction; that the complaint is not maintainable; that no deficiency in service has been alleged qua him; that the complainants have no locus standi etc. On merits it has been pleaded that the Coca Cola Company does not manufacturer/ sell its products directly but have licensed franchise bottler in different parts of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh and M/s Kandhari Beverages P. Ltd. has Licensed Franchise Agreement with the manufacturer i.e. Coca Cola Company. It has been alleged that the complainants have sued the OP in his personal capacity without alleging anything against him. Pleading that there has been no deficiency in service or unfair trade practice on his part prayer for dismissal of the complaint with costs has been made. 5. Parties led evidence in support of their contentions. 6. We have heard the complainant in person and learned counsel for the OPs and have also perused the record including the written arguments. 7. We have gone through the entire complaint. All the allegations which the complainant has made pertain to violation of law of Advertising Standard Council of India (for short referred to as “ASCI”). If at all there is any grievance with regard to the said violation of ASCI, no relief can be sought from this Forum as it can only be dealt with by the ASCI. Hence, the complainant has not been able to show any specific allegation made with respect to any of the violations of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act and as such the complaint is not maintainable. 8. In view of the above findings, there is no merit in the present complaint and the same is hereby dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 9. Certified copies of this order be sent to the parties free of charge. The file be consigned. Sd/- sd/- 6.4.2011 | [Dr. (Mrs) Madanjit Kaur Sahota] | | [Rajinder Singh Gill] | Cm | Member | | Presiding Member |
| | DR. MRS MADANJIT KAUR SAHOTA, MEMBER | MR. RAJINDER SINGH GILL, PRESIDING MEMBER | , | | 
