SRI. SAJEESH.K.P     : MEMBER

    The  Complainant has  filed this complaint  under Sec.35 of the Consumer Protection Act 2019 seeking direction against the  OP  to  get Rs.7,50,000/-  as the gift price and Rs.25,000/- as mental agony and Rs.10,000/-  as cost of litigation.

     The complainant in brief :-

  The complainant is a regular customer of OP and he purchase things from OP’s online platform.  The intimated complainant that he became a winner of lucky draw on their 13^th year celebration  and complainant got a registered cover on the very next day.  It is informed to complainant that he will get the prize which is engrossed on the associate coupon which was  included in cover.  The prizes described in the letter as car, bike, fridge, TV, laptop, cash prize etc and it is written on the letter that complainant will get the prize which is in the scratch coupon.  Fortunately, after scratching the coupon, it is seen that Rs.7,50,000/- as cash prize won by complainant.  In order to know the details, complainant contacted OP and they told to  Google pay Rs.7500/- as tax prior to the cash prize.  But complainant has no such online facility and he is apprehending that there is some sort of ulterior motives is  lying in OP’s activities.  The complainant is saying that  whenever government conducts lucky draw, they will distributes the cash prize to the winner only after deducting the tax not like OP’s  company.  So, the complainant is apprehending fraud in the OP’s statement with regard to the prior payment of tax amount before the distribution of cash prize.  Hence this complaint.

   After filing the complaint,  the commission was issued notice to OP which was duly served.  The OP has not appeared before the commission and not filed any version.  Hence the commission held that OP has no version and the case proceed against the OP as set exparte. 

         Even though, the opposite party has  remained ex-parte, it is for the complainant to establish the allegation made by him against the  OP.  Hence the complainant was called  upon to  produce  evidence in the form of proof affidavit and documents.  Accordingly the complainant  has chosen to produce his affidavit along with documents marking as Ext.A1 to A4 .  Ext.A1 is  the letter sent by OP to complainant. Ext.A2 is the scratch coupon, Ext.A3  is registered cover and Ext.A4 series  is the copy of whattsapp messages. So the OP  remained absent  in this case.  At the end the commission heard the case on merit.

      On the perusal of  documents produced by the complainant, the commission  answered the issue of deficiency in service  accordingly.

   As per the complaint, the complainant is a lottery agent and he won the cash prize of Naaptol(OP) through a scratch coupon sent by OP which was marked as Ext.A2.  It is seen from Ext.A1 that, the OP selected complainant to obtain prize, during their 13^th years of celebration and provided Ext.A2.  Moreover, the rules and conditions  are specifically mentioned in Ext.A1.  It is seen from Ext.A2, Rs.7,50,000/- cash prize won by complainant.  According to complainant the OP demanded Rs.7500/- as GST, to pay through bank or Gpay but complainant is stating that he has no bank account and there is no such rules and regulations mentioned as per Ext.A1  clause 2&3.  In Ext.A1, the OP clearly stated that the winner prize could not be adjusted towardsthe prize money under any circumstances .  In Ext.A4 series , the complainant demanded the cash prize and  the OP repeated the demand to send Rs.7500/- on which complainant is not amenable. He is demanding to adjust the money towards the cash prize.  The complainant is a lucky draw winner and he cannot claim to change the rules and regulations for him alone.  The commission does not seem to  be  fair  to direct  OP to change the rules for complainant.  On the perusal of Exts.A1 to A4, the commission found that OP laid down rules and regulations for the lucky draw which their customer  has  to follow.  The complainant is demanding to change  one of the rules and regulations  for him  and which seems to be unfair  since the  rules and regulations are made in ram not in personam  for their  participants  in lucky draw.  Hence the commission came  into  a conclusion that complainant is bound to follow the  rules and regulation if he intend to claim  the cash prize through Ext.A2.  So there is no deficiency in service from the part of OP.

    In the result, complaint is dismissed.  No order as to cost.

Exts

A1-letter sent by OP

A2- scratch coupon

A3- registered cover

A4 series-copy of whatts app messages

PW1-Balan.T-Complainant

Sd/                                                                            Sd/                                                                     Sd/

PRESIDENT                                               MEMBER                                                        MEMBER

Ravi Susha                      Molykutty Mathew.                            Sajeesh K.P

eva         

                                                   /Forwarded by Order/

                                                      ASSISTANT REGISTRAR