of    ‘Thums Up’   in  pursuance  of  the  advertisement  for   a

- 2 -

  Subsequently, on winning second prize approached the Shopkeeper  for  the  prize  when  he  was advised to

  at New Delhi.  He approached the petitioner at Delhi when he came to know that the business had been taken over by opp.party Nos. 2 & 3.  He then approached opp.party Nos. 2 & 3 but in vain, hence he filed a complaint before the District Forum which allowed the complaint against opp.party Nos. 2 & 3.  Aggrieved by the order of the District Forum, petitioner went in appeal before the State Commission which was dismissed by the impugned order. 

          In our view, the point of law involved in the present case is concluded against the petitioner by a judgment of the Division Bench of this Commission passed in FA No. 419/2002 – M/s. Coco-Cola India (P) Limited Vs. Dr. Amarjit Singh.  Although the counsel for the petitioner contends that there are certain factual differences between the two cases.  Some variation of facts would be there in each case, but the point of law decided in the present case is  squarely  concluded against  the  petitioner  and  the  impugned order

-         3 –

M/s. Coco-Cola India (P) Ltd. (supra), the