PEPSI COLA INDIA MANUFACTURING CO Vs. M RAJAPPA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal challenges the order dated 25th February, 2005 of the Karnataka State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Bangalore (the State Commission) in complaint no. 106 of 2001. By this order, the State Commission directed the Opposite party Pepsi Cola India Manufacturing Co. to pay to the complainant Rs. 5 lakh with interest @ 12% per annum from the date of the complaint till its realization, in addition to damages of Rs. 10,000/- for mental agony and hardship and cost of Rs. 5,000/ -.

(2.) THE facts of the case are simple. The complainant (respondent in this appeal) is a resident of Nallur Village, Channagiri Taluka, Davanagere District, Karnataka and runs a restaurant called Raj Bahavan / New Raj Bahavan. He purchased several bottles of Pepsi Cola pursuant to the advertisements issued by the appellant in various newspapers and on Television as well as Radio, announcing a scheme titled, Hai Koi Jawab. This promotional scheme of Pepsi was to run for four fortnights upto 31st July 2001. The essential features of the scheme (rules and regulations) were published simultaneously in the advertisements. These rules showed that the offer was in respect of red ringed crown of Pepsi sold in bottles of 300 ml, 250 ml and 200 ml. If a person bought any such bottle of Pepsi with a red ringed crown containing a pre-announced winning number under the crown, she/he was entitled to a prize. The prizes were offered on a first-cum-first-served basis, every fortnight, for four fortnights in a row. For every fortnight, there were five first prizes, each of Rs. 5 lakh; 250 second prizes of Rs. 10,000/- each; and third prizes of three bottles of Pepsi of 300 ml. The appellant also engaged the services of a firm of auditors to monitor and supervise the scheme. The scheme also announced that if a person bought Pepsi bottle (s) (350 ml, 250 ml or 200 ml) with the red ringed crown (s) and the crown (s) contained the three digit winning number, she/he was first required to inform the representative of the appellant at pre-announced telephone numbers the details of her/his own identification and the winning number and code number printed under the crown. For the first and the second prizes, the representatives of the appellant company were required to collect the winning crown (s) from the winner (s) and send them to the Auditors for verification and advising the company to issue cheque (s) for the prize money.

(3.) THE case of the complainant was that he bought several bottles of Pepsi during the period of the scheme and on noticing the winning number 420 under the crown of a bottle; he contacted the company directly to claim the first prize of Rs. 5 lakh. The appellant company, however, did not accede to his request. Aggrieved by this, the complainant sent a legal notice to the appellant company and followed it up with a complaint filed before the State Commission, with the result already mentioned.