ASCI bans 98 ads, including Flipkart, SBI, Air India, HUL, Airtel, Vodafone, Budweiser, Ghadi detergent in October 2016
The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) of the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) has banned as many as 98 advertisements out of 162 complaints it received across segments during October 2016. Out of 98 advertisements against which complaints were upheld, 37 belonged to the Healthcare category, 31 to the Education category, followed by six in the Food & Beverages category, five in Personal Care Category and 19 advertisements from other categories, the self-regulatory industry body said in a statement.
 
The banned ads are from prominent companies like Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd (Narayana Multispecialty Hospital), Abbott Healthcare Pvt Ltd (Pediasure), Bajaj Corp Ltd (Bajaj Almonds Drops Hair Oil), Cargill India Pvt  Ltd (Nature Fresh Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil), AB Inbev India Pvt  Ltd (Budweiser), GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd (Horlicks and Horlicks Growth), Rohit Surfactant Pvt Ltd (Ghadi Detergent Bar), State Bank of India (Type of Property, net annual Income & Minimum Loan amount), Usha International Ltd (Usha Fans), Air India Ltd, Go Airlines (India) Ltd (Go Valentine contest), Flipkart Internet Pvt Ltd (Flipkart - Sale of Titan Sonata digital Watch), Vodafone India Ltd, Bharti Airtel Ltd (Airtel), and Hindustan Unilever Ltd (Vim Bar)  among others, they range from FMCGs to autos, personal accessories to alcohol, and education to media.
 
HEALTHCARE:-
 
The CCC found the following claims of 35 advertisements in health care products or services to be either misleading or false or not adequately / scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s Code. Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the Drug & Magic Remedies Act and Chapter 1.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code. Complaints against the following advertisements were UPHELD.
1. Thosh (Thosh Ion Shower): The advertisement’s claims, “Good news for those who are suffering from Asthma, Respiratory diseases & Breathing problems, Allergy, Migraine Insomnia, And those who are fed up of taking heavy medication and pills for the same. Now Negative Ion therapy has a solution”, were not substantiated and are misleading by gross exaggeration. 
 
2. Respi Care (Salt Room Therapy): The advertisement’s claims, “100% Natural Therapy for Breathing & Skin Problems” - “Asthma - Bronchitis – Rheumatoid Arthritis – Sinusitis – Wheezing – Eczema – Psoriasis – ILD – COPD – Anxiety – Sarcoidosis -  Stress – Pulmonary Fibrosis – Respiratory Allergy – Smokers Cough – Frequent Cold Cough – Atopic Dermatitis”, is ambiguous and is misleading by implication and exaggeration as it suggests cure for various ailments claimed in the advertisement including Rheumatoid Arthritis and Sarcoidosis.
 
3. Radhe Sumiran Women’s Hospital: The advertisement’s claims in Gujarati (as translated into English), “Top-3 Best Test Tube Baby (IVF) Centre by Times of India Health Survey” and “Best in IVF”, were not substantiated with supporting proof, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
4. Capitol Hospital: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Successful treatment of cancer through Brachytherapy”, is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
5. Image Herbals (Till Night Capsule): The advertisement’s claim, “Best Ayurvedic Medicine for Happy Married Relationship”, was not substantiated with product efficacy data, and is misleading.  Also, this claim read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.  
 
6. MFB Herbal Dawakhana (Alshifa Churna): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Reduce Weight”, “reduces two to four inches of your Belly fat in two months” and “Alshifa Churna reduces the excess fat on your body, arthritis and joints pain and your increased belly fat and makes your body and personality beautiful without any gym”,  were not substantiated with proof of efficacy, and efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment in the advertisement and on the pack are misleading.  With reference to the claim “motapa ghataye” and the accompanying visual, the advertisement is misleading by implication that the product would solve the problem of obesity and therefore is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
7. Surya Pharmaceuticals (Nephromed Tablets & Syrup): The advertisement’s claim, “Avoid Dialysis & Kidney Transplant”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy and any clinical data specific to the product being advertised and was misleading by exaggeration.  The claim of “Claims of healing accepted by the Govt.” was not misleading by ambiguity and implication.  
 
8. Advance Homeopathy Research Centre: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Certificate from Golden Book of World Records for taking out 11*66mm stones without operation”, was not substantiated with authentic data, and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
9. Rediscover Clinic: The advertisement’s claims, “Get rid of unwanted bulges”, “Spot reduction - Lose upto five to eight centimetres from one area (Non- Surgical)”,  “Seven Days Fast Track Programme Body Sculpting & Shaping-Lose unto 35-50 cm from Abdomen, Hips, Thighs etc. and upto five kilograms through Anticellulite treatment”, were not substantiated with  clinical proof of treatment efficacy, and are misleading.  Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment in the advertisement is grossly misleading.
 
10. 34 Heart Care: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Freedom from heart diseases, Treatment without operation”, and the visuals in the print advertisement were misleading by ambiguity and implication.  Also, specific to the claims related to treatment of heart disease, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
11. The Body Care & Cure: The advertisement’s claim, “Reduce upto Five Kilograms in just 12 Hours”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.
 
12. Achme A Health Ashram: The advertisement’s claim, “Lose upto eight and ten centimetres in one sitting from one area without any efforts”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.  
 
13. Adila Biotech Pvt. Ltd (Asth Prash): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Effect starts within three days” and “Sure shot Medicine for respiratory diseases”, were not substantiated with evidence for product efficacy, or any clinical studies and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
14. Bhatia Global Hospital & Endo-surgery Institute: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Now get freedom from obesity”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence among statistically significant number of people, and is misleading by exaggeration.  Also, efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment is misleading.  Specific to the claims implying cure from obesity, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
15. Vee Care Marketing World Pvt. Ltd. (Vee Care Ayurveda Range of Products): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Reduce Sugar, otherwise get your money back. **”, was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration.  Also, specific to the claims implying treatment for Diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
16. Herb On Naturals (Herb On SHAPE): The advertisement’s claims, “Loose weight faster”, “Burns fat- Help prevent fat buildups”, “Controls appetite- Reduces Overeating”, “Corrects mood- Reduces calorie intake”, “Ignites Metabolism- decreases your belly fat” and “No side effects”,  were not substantiated with proof of efficacy of the product, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
17. Amplifon India Pvt. Ltd. (Hearing aid): The advertisement’s claim, “World’s largest hearing care service provider in 22 countries”, was not substantiated with data comparing the market share of the advertiser versus other similar companies and is misleading by exaggeration. Also the claim, “Over 180 clinics with experienced audiologists”, was not substantiated and is misleading. Further the claim, “Free Aftercare Service for lifetime”, was not substantiated with details of the free service being offered by the advertiser.  Also, the claim is misleading by omission of the conditions for the service offered. 
 
18. Aarav Speech & Hearing Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Complete solution to all the problems related to hearing & speech” was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration, and “Speech Therapy for Stammering & Stuttering”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure for deafness (a condition referred in Schedule J item 13 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) and reference to stammering and stuttering the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106 and The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
19. Powerlife Wellness Centre: The advertisement’s claims (in Gujarathi) as translated in English, “No Medicines, No Injections, No Radiation, No Operation, No Pain, No Side Effects, 100% Safe”, “Treatment of Diseases without medicine”,  “Treatment for Cancer, Diabetes, Depression, Arthritis Etc”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration.  Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for Cancer, Diabetes, Arthritis, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.  
 
20. Ashoka Super Speciality Women Hospital: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Two times Limca Book of World Record for Successful treatment of thousands of childless couples in 25 years, Country’s First Test tube Baby Centre”, “Most Successful”, and “Time Lapse System – Success Rate 60% to 70%”, were inadequately substantiated with authentic supporting data, comparison with other similar hospitals and are misleading by exaggeration.  Specific to the claims related to successful treatment for childless couples (implying successful treatment of infertility), the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
21. Sahas Homeo Clinic and Medical Store: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Are you suffering from Kidney Stones? Cure for Kidney Stones is possible without operation” and “If you are suffering from any incurable diseases come to us we will help you to get cured with our Homeopathic Treatment”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration.  Specific to the claims related to cure for Kidney stones, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
22. Geetanjali Hospital: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Upto 90% Successful Surgery”, “To detect cancer is easy but Getting it Diagnosed at the right time can help cure your cancer”, “1st time in India cure for cancer by FFF Radiosurgery”, “Cancer cells completely destroyed”, “Lung and Spinal cancer can be treated within three minutes” and “Brain Cancer can be cured within two minutes”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by gross exaggeration.  Specific to the claims related to treatment/cure for Cancer, Lung and Spinal cancer, Brain Cancer, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.  
 
23. Ambica Ayurved (Nav Paurush Capsule & Powder): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Helps in removing the weakness, gaining weight, helps in body building”, was not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy, and are misleading by exaggeration.
 
24. Arogya India Pharmacy: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “This medicine removes diabetes by developing insulin”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy, and is misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims implying cure of diabetes, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
25. Khushi Ayurveda Pvt. Ltd.: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Lose Weight without any Yoga, without dieting in just 45 days”, “After The Deep Research In Ayurveda From Past Many Years, KHUSHI AYURVEDA PVT LTD Has Come Out With A Unique Medicine With Which You Can Lose Weight Without Any Restriction”, were not substantiated with product efficacy data. Also the claim, “If you don't find any benefit, get your fees back”, was not substantiated with evidence to prove that fees have been refunded to those who have not been benefitted by the product.  The claims are misleading by exaggeration and ambiguity.
 
26. American Skin and Dental Centre: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Only safe & sure treatment of Baldness/Eyebrows/Less hair in beards” and “Through PRP (Platelets Rich Plasma Cells) get 500 percent growth with one vaccination”, were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading by exaggeration. Specific to the claims related to sure treatment of baldness implying a cure, (a condition referred in Schedule J of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106.  Also, efficacy claims being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading.
 
27. Limra Active Viwing & Laser Skin Care Centre: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Remove baldness in two hours”, “Lose one & half kilograms weight in just one hour without medicine”, and “Get Rid of Spots and Scars of Chicken Pox”,  were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Specific to the claims implying cure of baldness (a condition referred in Schedule J of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act) the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Cosmetics Rule 106. Claims efficacy being depicted via images before and after the treatment for baldness in the advertisement is misleading.
 
28. Dr Danish Khan Wellness Clinic: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “First time in North India Instant & Permanent relief from pain through German technique matrix rhythm therapy in just 1-8 sittings”, were not substantiated with authentic supporting evidence. Also the claim, “Reduce 10 kg in just one month”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence. Further the claim, The Biggest Multi Speciality Physiotherapy Hospital in North India”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration. 
 
29. Vardhan Ayurvedic Organisation: The advertisement’s claim (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Permanently cure joint pain at home itself without any operation”, was not substantiated with supporting clinical evidence, and is misleading by exaggeration. 
 
30. Narayana Hrudayalaya Ltd. (Narayana Multispecialty Hospital): The advertisement’s claim, “The only reliable option in treatment of Joints related Problem.” was not substantiated with clinical evidence comparing with other possible options, and is misleading by gross exaggeration.  
 
31. Sahar Herbal Pharmacy Pvt. Ltd. (Rasayan Kalp Powder): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated in English, “Complete Benefit in 3 days”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence of product efficacy and is misleading.  Also, specific to the claims related to remedy for sexual diseases read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.
 
32. OPTM Health Care Private Ltd.: The advertisement’s claim, “Certified by European Medical Association (EMA)”, was not substantiated with supporting evidence such as EMA certification supporting the claim as it appears in the TVC, and is misleading.
 
33. Herbal Strategi (Herbal Repellents – Range of Products): The advertisement’s claim, “Prevent dengue by spraying certified herbal repellent”, was inadequately substantiated. While the advertiser has provided certificates by laboratories, the reference to “certification” in the context of “prevention of dengue” is misleading by ambiguity and implication as the product merely reduces mosquito bites by repellent action and reduction in mosquito landing on skin does not imply prevention of dengue.
 
34. Abbott Healthcare P. Ltd. (Pediasure): It was noted that the product is being depicted as an answer to daily balanced diet. The claim that Pediasure provides “Complete” nutrition is misleading and exaggerated as the description in the title and body of the study conducted calls it "oral supplementation". Nutritional Supplement can be only a supplement and cannot replace Normal Nutrition, whatever it may contain. The advertisement’s claim, “Iske 37 Nutrients de “sampoorn poshan” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration. The disclaimers in the advertisement (TVC) are not clearly legible.  Also, the disclaimers in the Hindi advertisement (TVC) are not in the same language as the audio of the advertisement (TVC).  
 
35. Shree Maruti Herbal (Stay On Power Capsules): It was noted that the advertisement with suggestive text in the body copy, claim of “Power capsule” and visuals read in conjunction, implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act, Rule 106 Schedule J Item 36.
 
36. Dindayal Industries Ltd. (Rangoli Tablet): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Energising Tablet Specially for Women” and “An Effective Energy Booster, Stamina and Powerful tablets with the added Goodness of gold, Silver, Pearl, Saffron, the time tested elements that energise and revitalize the body”, were inadequately substantiated, and are misleading. While the advertiser said that the “Outstanding Achievement Award – 2016 (For Ayurveda)” was granted to them by Federation of MP  Chamber of Commerce and Industry, it was not substantiated with details regarding the award such as copy of the award / certificate etc. The advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify this claim.  
 
37. Sanjeevani Herbals (Ayurveda Mix Plus Kashaya Soap): The advertisement’s claim (in Malayalam) as translated into English, “Ayurvedamix Plus Kashaya Soap is the only soap in the market with 80-88% TFM”, was not substantiated with analytical report for TFM measurement and comparative data versus other similar soaps in the same category, and is misleading. 
 
PERSONAL CARE:-
 
1. Zee Laboratories Limited (Zee Myfair Cream): The advertisement’s claim, “Medically Proven”, was not substantiated with clinical evidence, and is misleading.  Also the claim, “Trust of More Than 50 Lakh People”, was not proven with supporting data and is misleading by exaggeration. Further the claim, “President Award Winner”, was not substantiated with details of the award as well as references of the award such as the year, source and category for the award received.  The advertisement is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim.
 
2. Unique Permanent Hair Loss Cream: The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “Get rid of hair for a lifetime through cream by applying the cream twice”, “Get rid of the hair on face, private parts, chest and waist just by applying the cream twice”, “100% Ayurvedic”, “No Itching, No Burning, No Spots, No Black Marks”, “You will only Benefit from the use if this cream, it has no harmful effects at all”, were not substantiated with evidence of product efficacy. Further the claim, “Trusted by 6.5 Cr. Indians”, was not proven with supporting data or with any independent audit or verification certificate.   Also, claims of efficacy being depicted via images of before and after the treatment are misleading.
 
3. Bajaj Corp. Ltd. (Bajaj Almonds Drops Hair Oil): The advertisement’s claims, “get the nourishment of almonds” and “it has goodness of almonds”; along with visuals showing almonds, without having undisputedly proven the presence of real almond oil in the product in a reasonable quantity was misleading by ambiguity and implication.
 
4. Vanesa Care Pvt. Ltd. (Denver Xtreme Performance Active Deodorant): There being no evidence to show that Denver Xtreme deodorant is twice as effective in double antiperspirant / sweat control as compared to other competitive products in the same category, the advertiser’s claim of “2X Sweat Defence”, was inadequately substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration.
 
5. Sripali’s (Sripali’s Super Kesh Care Oil): The advertisement’s claim (in Bengali) as translated into English, “To give 100 percent result in just 1 pack” was not substantiated with product efficacy data and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
FOOD & BEVERAGES:-
1. Cargill India Pvt. Ltd. (Nature Fresh Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil): The advertisement’s claim, “Professional Best Fry Premium Frying Oil”, was inadequately substantiated with comparison data with other blended oils, and is misleading by ambiguity and implication as the Advertiser has not supported this terminology with actual frying trial comparisons to prove that their product is the “best” among all other oils in the market for frying.
 
2. AB Inbev India Private Limited (Budweiser): The advertisement on the brand’s Twitter page makes reference to Music CDs, through which it was concluded that the advertisement was a surrogate advertisement for the promotion of a liquor product – Budweiser Beer. Thus, the advertisement is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted by this Code.) Also, the advertisement did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”). It was also observed that the twitter homepage also shows the beer bottle which is in contravention of Chapter III.4 of the ASCI code.
 
3. Cargill India P. Ltd. (Nature Fresh ActiLite Cooking Oil): The advertisement’s claims, “Low fat cooking”, “Lite on food”, and “Low oil absorption”, were not substantiated with any evidence or technical test reports and are misleading.  The disclaimers in the advertisement (TVC) were not clearly legible.  Also, the supers in the Hindi advertisement (TVC) were not in the same language as the audio of the advertisement (TVC).
 
4. GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (Horlicks): The advertisement’s claims, “Horlicks now has two times higher immune-nutrients, that helps support your child’s immunity and make him taller, stronger, sharper”, “Strong inside. Taller, Stronger, Sharper outside”, were inadequately substantiated (in the context of immunity related claims) and are misleading by implication of enhancement of immunity. The advertisement was also misleading by ambiguity and omission of clear demarcation of two separate disclaimers for two distinct claims.    
 
5. GlaxoSmithKline Consumer Healthcare Ltd. (Horlicks Growth): It was observed that the advertisement uses the word “naturally” (“New Horlicks Growth+ naturally enhances bone growth*…..”) and “Naturally” implies "Natural" growth without any artificial inputs.  The use of this word "naturally" for an artificially composed drink supplemented in overall food intake is likely to mislead the consumers by ambiguity.
 
6. Ashok & Co. Pan Bahar Ltd. (Pan Bahar Masala): The advertiser has shown the celebrity (Pierce Brosnan) for all their product range of Pan Bahar that includes Pan Masala category (Pan Bahar Crystal & Pan Bahar Heritage) in various advertisements.  The Pan Masala advertisement has a health warning “Pan Masala is injurious to health”. It was concluded that minors are very likely to be exposed to the advertisements in various media such as print, hoarding and TVC, etc. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. The advertisement showing the celebrity contravened Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code, which specifically states that Advertisements “Should not feature personalities from the field of sports and entertainment for products which, by law, require a health warning “Panmasala is injurious to health” in their advertising or packaging.” The CCC also noted that the advertisement for Pan Bahar Crystal & Pan Bahar Heritage is misleading by implication and contravened Chapters I.4 and III.6(b) of the ASCI Code (“Whether there exists in the advertisement under complaint any direct or indirect clues or cues which could suggest to consumers that it is a direct or indirect advertisement for the product whose advertising is restricted or prohibited by law or by this Code.”). Also, the advertisements did not meet the requirements as per ASCI's Guidelines for Qualification of Brand Extension Product or Service and thereby contravened Chapter III.6 (a) of the ASCI Code (“Whether the unrestricted product which is purportedly sought to be promoted through the advertisement under the complaint is produced and distributed in reasonable quantities, having regard to the scale of the advertising in question, the media used and the markets targeted.”).
 
EDUCATION:-
The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by 31 different advertisers were not substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence complaints against these advertisements were UPHELD. 
1. Think & Learn Pvt Ltd (BYJUs Classes): The advertisement’s claim, “70% of our GMAT students in last 8 years have crossed 700”,  was not substantiated with authentic supporting data nor any independent audit or verification certificate, and the claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
2. K. C. Mahindra Education Trust (Nanhi Kali): The advertisement portrays a girl aged six to seven years cuts her hair with a scissor, just to look like a boy so that she can also join school. The advertiser states that the cutting of the hair by the girl child is symbolic of her dilemma to fit into a society we live in and they have put in Supers to strongly discourage any re-enaction. But it was noted that the disclaimer in the advertisement (TVC) is not legible.  Also, the disclaimer in the advertisement (TVC) is not in the same language as the audio of the TVC (Hindi), and the duration of the supers in the advertisement (TVC) are not for 6 seconds on the screen.  
 
3. Millennium Group of Institutions: The advertisement’s claim, “Leader in campus Placement”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim.  Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and omission of the reference to the particular criteria for which they are the leader.  The claim, “Awarded for best Technical Education”, was not substantiated with details, references of the award received such as the year, source and category.  The claim is misleading by omission of a disclaimer to qualify the claim.
 
Complaints against advertisements of all educational institutes listed below mostly are UPHELD because of unsubstantiated claims that they ‘provide 100% placement/AND/OR they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields’
 
Amity University, Gate Institute of Technology & Management, Bhadauria Group of Institutions (Jaswant Sinh Bhadauria Institute of Technology & Baba Saheb Ambedkar Polytechnic), Dr. Virendra Swarup Group of Institutions, CAC CA Campus, Desh Bhagat University, Uttam Group of Institutions, Lakshya Group of Colleges, Ganpat University U.V Patel College of Engineering, Vision Group of Institutions, MIET Computer, Green Fields Institute of Agriculture, GOAL Educational Services Pvt. Ltd (GOAL Coaching), S R Group of Institution, Br. Nath Pai Shikshan Sanstha Sindhudurg.- (Br. Nath Pai Nursing Education & Research Academy), MV Media Institute, Gandhi Engineering College, Shivalik Polytechnic, Eshan College of Engineering, International Institution of Technology & Professional Training (IITPT), British School of Languages, Rise Study Circle, HP College of Education  (HP Institute of Management Studies) (HPIMS), Universal Coaching Centre, Raju Coaching Centre, Ansh Nursing College, Chandravansi Group Organization of Institution and SRSM Defence Academy.
 
OTHERS:-
 
1. Rohit Surfactant Pvt. Ltd. (Ghadi Detergent Bar): The print advertisement’s claims, “Ab Jaisa bhi Mel Ho, Uska Puri Tarah Se Safya” (“Now be any kind of dirt, it gets completely cleaned”), and the TVC’s claim, “Is se Cuff aur Collar ho saaf puri tarah” (“It completely cleans cuff and collar”), were not substantiated with an independent third party study, and are misleading by exaggeration.  
 
2. Enter 10 Televisions Pvt. Ltd (Bhojpuri Cinema): The advertisement’s claim, “No.1 Bhojpuri Channel, 4 Weeks In A Row”, is false, was not substantiated.
 
3. Cheil India P. Ltd (Samsung Galaxy S5): The advertisement’s claims an offer "Get free 4G data for 6 months”, is misleading by ambiguity and omission of the mention of conditions. Though the offer was available on 3G and 4G variants of Galaxy S5, since the customer has purchased the 3G variant he is eligible for the 3G data for 6 months but not eligible for the 4G data offer. It was noted that a consumer who opts to buy a lower priced phone, could be misled as the advertisement does not provide this information.
 
4. Andslite Pvt. Ltd. (Andslite Lighting Products): The advertisement’s claims, “India's No.1 LED Products”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar products in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim.  Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration.
 
5. Panasonic India Pvt. Ltd. (Panasonic Life Conditioners): It was noted that the advertiser is using a coined word “Nanoe-G” to describe “fine particles consisting of ions and radicals”; While the AC may have the capacity to remove dust and kill bacteria due to Negative ions being emitted, the reference to “Nano” is misleading by ambiguity and implication as negative ions are not considered as Nano particles.  It was concluded that the claim, “Nanoe-G technology” implied that product was based on Nano Technology but there was no data substantiating that and therefore is misleading by ambiguity and implication.
 
6. Xiaomi Technology India Private Limited (Kevlar Fiber Cable): The advertisement’s claim, “Durable, break-resistant Kevlar fiber cable”, was not substantiated and is misleading.  
 
7. State Bank of India (Type of Property, net annual Income & Minimum Loan amount): The product/service advertised under URL provided (https://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personalhttps://www.sbi.co.in/portal/web/personal-banking/loans-against-propertybanking/loans-against-property) is false and misleading as it is an old product/service being advertised. 
 
8. Usha International Ltd. (Usha Fans): The advertisement’s claim, “reigning national champion for over 60 years” was not substantiated in the absence of claim support data to prove that Usha has been market leader in terms of value or volume share consistently for the last 60 years. Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration.  
 
9. Air India Ltd: The advertisement’s claims, “How do some of our friends react when their passengers discover that we offer more leg space, hot meals and more luggage allowance?......” With INDIGnation!” was not substantiated.  Also, the advertisement – hoarding is misleading and by implication unfairly denigrates other competitor airlines.    
 
10. Nitikrushna Enterprises (RET Lifeguard RO Water Purifier): The advertisement’s claims (in Hindi) as translated into English, “India's No.1 Water Purifier Company”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar competitors’ in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim.  Also, the claim is misleading by exaggeration.  
 
11. Jewel Souk Online Jewellery Marketplace Ltd: The advertisement’s claims, “Diamond pe Diamond free” and  “Flat 50% off on diamond Jewellery plus assured diamond jewel free”, were not substantiated with details of the offer, the terms and conditions applicable, duration of the offer, evidence of the customers who have availed the said offer, etc. Also the claim, “Jewelsouk.com is world’s largest Jewellery marketplace”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar competitor Jewellers in the same category or any third party validation or research to prove this claim.  Further the claims are misleading by exaggeration.
 
12. Go Airlines (India) Ltd. (Go Valentine contest): The advertisement states, “Tell us which GoAir destination u want to fly to, with ur valentine. 3 lucky winners can win tickets to that destination”, and the SMS received by the Complainant states, “Congrats on winning the #GoValentine Contest.  Avail Rs.500 off on your next booking with GoAir”. The advertisement is misrepresentation of facts, and is misleading by omission of the date of execution, date of announcements of winners of the contest, and that it is subject to terms and conditions.  The advertiser has not stated clearly all material conditions so as to enable the consumer to obtain a true and fair view of their prospects in such activities.
 
13. Flipkart Internet Private Limited (Flipkart – Sale of Titan Sonata digital Watch): The advertisement through website communication claiming the MRP of the product as Rs.599 was false. The advertisement offering a discounted price of Rs.479, when the actual MRP of the product is Rs.399, distorts facts and is therefore misleading the consumers as to actual discount being offered.
 
14. Zee Entertainment Enterprises Ltd. (Z ETC Channel): The advertisement’s claim, “They Just Got Played – ZETC beats Bindass Play”, was not substantiated and is misleading. While the advertiser has referred to BARC data as a source for their claim, it was noted that as per “BARC India Ratings – Principles of Fair and Permissible Usage” the period of comparison for any claim of leadership should cover at least four consecutive weeks of data. However, as per the disclaimer put by the advertiser for the claim is based on single week (week 36’16) and not four consecutive weeks of data as per BARC. Therefore it is violative of BARC Principles. The subject matter of comparison is chosen in such a way so as to confer an artificial advantage upon the advertiser so as to suggest that a better bargain is offered than is truly the case.
 
15. Socomo Technologies P. Ltd (Jugnoo): The advertisement’s claim offer, “Take 3 Rides get 4th Free”, is misleading as the 4th ride is not free but is subject to terms and conditions that the cashback being offered is limited to Rs.50/-. 
 
16. Vodafone India Ltd.: The advertisement’s claim, “Get the all new iphone7 before the world!”, is false and is misleading by exaggeration.
 
17. Bharti Airtel Ltd. (Airtel): The advertiser states that the recharge of Rs.29 advertised as “Mahiney bhar ka internet” is only with respect to the validity of the sachet pack priced at Rs.29.  The supers in the advertisement informs the customers that 75 MB of data is offered on a recharge of Rs.29 with validity of 30 days. It was noted that the advertisement visual depicts tabs for Facebook and YouTube implying that data may be used for these Apps, but for the Facebook and YouTube applications, 75 MB is not likely to last for a month.  The claim (in Hindi), “Rs.29 Mahiney bhar ka internet” (Rs.29 Internet for full month) is misleading by ambiguity and implication.  
 
18. Hindustan Unilever Limited (Vim Bar): The TVC showcases the visual of the “ordinary” bar, which is being aired in South India, where Exo enjoys a significant market share and where it is unique in terms of product presentation (a green round bar in round red container) in the advertisement, implies Exo Bar. Also the voice over makes a reference of "Sadharan" bar (ordinary bar), implying that it is ordinary or inferior. There being no other criteria for calling out a product as “ordinary”, it was considered the TVC to be misleading by ambiguity and implication and  unfairly denigrated Exo dish wash bar.  Also while the TVC makes a top parity claim, the pack claim, “Vim removes grease fastest*” makes a product superiority claim. There was a mismatch between the claim and its corresponding disclaimer (i.e. “As per independent lab test conducted on burnt food stain”) as the claim refers to “grease” whereas disclaimer and the pack visual appears to show kadhai with burnt food stain being cleaned.  It was concluded that the claim read in conjunction with the disclaimer and the pack visual is misleading by ambiguity and implication, and the claim of superiority has not been conclusively proven. 
 
19. Aghin Chemicals (Sun Plus Aquamatic): The advertisement’s claim, “New Sun Plus Aquamatic detergent powder keeps your clothes bright, fixes the original colours and leaves them fragranced throughout the day!” was not substantiated with technical tests/trials report and with product efficacy data.  Also the claim, “Sun plus Aquamatic detergent powder is the superior, more powerful and the unique washing formula than any other detergent available so far”, was not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar detergents in the same category. Also, the claims are misleading.
 
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    P b Sarma

    3 years ago

    THERE ARE MANY MISLEADING ADVERTISEMENTS.BANNING OF SUCH ADVTS IS NOT ENOUGH.WHAT IS THE PUNISHMENT FOR GIVING FALSE ADVTS AND EARNING UNJUSTLY SO FAR.GOVT IS VERY LINIENT TOWARDS CHEATING OF PEOPLE BY THE COMPANIES.

    ramdas naik

    3 years ago

    The actions taken by ASCII should be publicized in the news at the advertisers cost so that the public is aware of the misleading ads and products. All fairness cream ads also should be banned as they are discriminatory and misleading

    3 die every 10 minutes in road accidents; up 9% in 4 Years
    There were nine road accidents that killed three people every 10 minutes in 2015, according to new national data, an increase of nine per cent over four years.
     
    Road accidents killed 148,000 people in 2015 compared to 136,000 in 2011, according to the Accidental Deaths and Suicides in India report released by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB). Road accidents accounted for 83 per cent of all traffic-related deaths in India and 43 per cent of all accidental deaths in 2015.
     
    Other traffic-related deaths were from railway accidents (15 per cent) and accidents at railway crossings (two per cent).
     
    There were 464,000 road accidents in 2015, an increase of three per cent from 2014, when there were 450,000 road accidents.
     
    While Tamil Nadu (69,059), Karnataka (44,011) and Maharashtra (42,250) reported the most road accidents, Uttar Pradesh reported the highest number of deaths in road accidents (18,407).
     
    The road transport sector contributes to 4.8 per cent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP), but India loses 1-3 per cent of GDP due to road accidents, according to a 2007 report of the road transport working group of the erstwhile Planning Commission for the XIth Plan. 
     
    Despite a national road safety strategy and laws on speed limits, wearing helmets and seat belts and drunk-driving, the World Health Organisation rates India's enforcement as 3 out of 10 on speed limits, 4 out of 10 on wearing motorcycle helmet, 4 out of 10 on drunk-driving and 4 out of 10 on wearing seat belts. 
     
    Two-wheeler accidents accounted for 29 per cent of all fatal road accidents in 2015, claiming 45,540 lives, followed by trucks (19 per cent), which killed 28,910 people and cars (12 per cent), which killed 18,506 people.
     
    Tamil Nadu (3,668) and Maharashtra (3,146) reported the largest number of people killed in two-wheeler accidents, while Uttar Pradesh had reported the largest number of lives lost due to truck accidents (5,720) and car accidents (2,135).
     
    More pedestrians were killed in Maharashtra (1,256) than any other state, accounting for 17 per cent of pedestrian deaths.
     
    Although national highways account for only 1.51 per cent of India's road length, they accounted for 28 per cent of road accidents and 33 per cent of road-mishap deaths nationwide in 2015.
     
    State highways, three per cent of India's road length, contributed to 25 per cent of road accidents and 28 per cent of deaths due to road mishaps.
     
    Over-speeding was responsible for 41 per cent of deaths in road accidents, while careless or dangerous driving claimed 32 per cent of death in road accidents. Poor weather (four per cent) and mechanical defects (three per cent) in motor vehicles were other causes for deaths in road accidents.
     
    Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra had the most number of casualties due to over-speeding, with 15 per cent and 12 per cent of cases, respectively.
     
    Uttar Pradesh had the largest number of deaths due to careless/dangerous driving (17 per cent), followed by Maharashtra (nine per cent).
     
    Chennai accounted for nine per cent of all road accidents in 53 cities, followed by Delhi (nine per cent) and Bengaluru (six per cent). Delhi (eight per cent) and Jaipur (five per cent) had the largest number of deaths in road accidents.
     
    Disclaimer: Information, facts or opinions expressed in this news article are presented as sourced from IANS and do not reflect views of Moneylife and hence Moneylife is not responsible or liable for the same. As a source and news provider, IANS is responsible for accuracy, completeness, suitability and validity of any information in this article.
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Bapoo Malcolm

    3 years ago

    While the accident rate is a serious issue, a bit of black humour may be added. It's below.

    Hilarious Article by a Dutchman who visited India.
    For the benefit of every Tom, Dick and Harry visiting India and daring to drive on Indian roads, I am offering a few hints for survival. They are applicable to every place in India except Bihar -- where life outside a vehicle is only marginally safer.

    Indian road rules broadly operate within the domain of karma where you do your best, and leave the results to your insurance company.

    The hints are as follows:
    Do we drive on the left or right of the road? The answer is "both".

    Basically you start on the left of the road, unless it is occupied. In that case, go to the right, unless that is also occupied. Then proceed by occupying the next available gap, as in chess. Just trust your instincts, ascertain the direction, and proceed.

    Adherence to road rules leads to much misery and occasional fatality. Most drivers don't drive, but just aim their vehicles in the generally intended direction. Don't you get discouraged or underestimate yourself except for a belief in reincarnation; the other drivers are not in any better position.

    Don't stop at pedestrian crossings just because some fool wants to cross the road. You may do so only if you enjoy being bumped in the back. Pedestrians have been strictly instructed to cross only when traffic is moving slowly or has come to a dead stop because some minister is in town. Still some idiot may try to wade across, but then, let us not talk ill of the dead.

    Blowing your horn is not a sign of protest as in some countries. We honk to express joy, resentment, frustration, romance and bare lust (two brisk blasts),or just mobilize a dozing cow in the middle of the bazaar.

    Keep informative books in the glove compartment. You may read them during traffic jams, while awaiting the chief minister's motorcade, or waiting for the rainwater to recede when over ground traffic meets underground drainage.

    Occasionally you might see what looks like a UFO with blinking colored lights and weird sounds emanating from within. This is an illuminated bus, full of happy pilgrims singing bhajans. These pilgrims go at breakneck speed, seeking contact with the Almighty, often meeting with success.

    Auto Rickshaw (Baby Taxi):
    The result of a collision between a rickshaw and an automobile, this three-wheeled vehicle works on an external combustion engine that runs on a mixture of kerosene oil and creosote. This triangular vehicle carries iron rods, gas cylinders or passengers three times its weight and dimension, at an unspecified fare. After careful geometric calculations, children are folded and packed into these auto rickshaws until some children in the periphery are not in contact with the vehicle at all. Then their school bags are pushed into the microscopic gaps all round so those minor collisions with other vehicles on the road cause no permanent damage. Of course, the peripheral children are charged half the fare and also learn Newton 's laws of motion enroute to school. Auto-rickshaw drivers follow the road rules depicted in the film Ben Hur, and are licensed to irritate.

    Mopeds:
    The moped looks like an oil tin on wheels and makes noise like an electric shaver. It runs 30 miles on a teaspoon of petrol and travels at break-bottom speed. As the sides of the road are too rough for a ride, the moped drivers tend to drive in the middle of the road; they would rather drive under heavier vehicles instead of around them and are often "mopped" off the tarmac.

    Leaning Tower of Passes:
    Most bus passengers are given free passes and during rush hours, there is absolute mayhem. There are passengers hanging off other passengers, who in turn hang off the railings and the overloaded bus leans dangerously, defying laws of gravity but obeying laws of surface tension. As drivers get paid for overload (so many Rupees per kg of passenger), no questions are ever asked. Steer clear of these buses by a width of three passengers.

    One-way Street:
    These boards are put up by traffic people to add jest in their otherwise drab lives. Don't stick to the literal meaning and proceed in one direction. In metaphysical terms, it means that you cannot proceed in two directions at once. So drive as you like, in reverse throughout, if you are the fussy type.

    Least I sound hypercritical, I must add a positive point also. Rash and fast driving in residential areas has been prevented by providing a "speed breaker"; two for each house. This mound, incidentally, covers the water and drainage pipes for that residence and is left untarred for easy identification by the corporation authorities, should they want to recover the pipe for year-end accounting.

    Night driving on Indian roads can be an exhilarating experience for those with the mental make-up of Genghis Khan. In a way, it is like playing Russian roulette, because you do not know who amongst the drivers is loaded. What looks like premature dawn on the horizon turns out to be a truck attempting a speed record. On encountering it, just pull partly into the field adjoining the road until the
    phenomenon passes.

    Our roads do not have shoulders, but occasional boulders.

    Do not blink your lights expecting reciprocation. The only dim thing in the truck is the driver, and with the peg of illicit arrack (alcohol) he has had at the last stop, his total cerebral functions add up to little more than a naught.

    Truck drivers are the James Bonds of India, and are licensed to kill. Often you may encounter a single powerful beam of light about six feet above the ground. This is not a super motorbike, but a truck approaching you with a single light on, usually the left one. It could be the right one, but never get too close to investigate. You may prove your point posthumously.


    Bapoo Malcolm

    3 years ago

    No matter how many laws are in place, in the case of road accidents, it is the public that must take care. That means both parties. One may be super careful, but what of the other maniac on the road? He is the one that needs to be taught. Again, the police are more interested in haftas, netas more interested in fancy number plates, so that they announce their arrival at toll nakas. Any Tom, Dick or Harry can put up speed breakers, non-standard, or cut through dividers; weak shoulders force trucks to hog the centre of the roads. In short, no one cares. A few less, what difference does it make? Chalta Hai!

    Insurance: A widow gets justice from the apex court after 11-year battle
    It took a gusty woman and a dedicated consumer activist almost 11 years to fight the giant Life Insurance Corporation, largest insurance corporation, for the money due to her on the death of her husband. The result: a Rs21 lakh award on an insurance claim of Rs15 lakh. She owes her success to the help she received from MY Patil, a former assistant commissioner of police who is now a consumer activist.  
     
    On 24 April 2003, Rahul Singh (name changed) bought two policies of LIC Anmol Jeevan of Rs10 lakh and Rs5 lakh by paying Rs3,201 and Rs1,722, respectively as the first premium. As per the rules, Rahul was subjected to medical tests and examination by doctors on LIC's panel, who found him fit and healthy. On 2 May 2003, the LIC branch in Mumbai accepted the proposal forms for Rahul Singh's insurance policies and he received the premium receipts dated 31 May 2003  in June 2003. After some three months, he received documents for both his insurance policies that were examined and signed on 5 June 2003. As per the policy documents, Rahul's insurance cover was shown as having commenced from 7 May 2003 with the policy expiry date after 15 years or 7 May 2018. The premium date was fixed as 7th May each year.
     
    On 16 April 2004, Rahul was diagnosed with malignant bone cancer. From 21st April, he started taking treatment in the Tata Memorial Hospital. Next month, on 25 May 2004, he was admitted to the hospital. However, unable to cope with the unbearable pain, Rahul Singh committed suicide on 28 May 2004. 
     
    Rahul's wife, Rohini was his nominee and filed an insurance claim. LIC rejected her claim through a letter dated 29 September 2004 on the grounds that it was made within a year from the date of policy and hence could not be entertained. Rohini sent letters to the Chairman of LIC but could not get justice. She then filed complaint before the Insurance Ombudsman. The ombudsman passed strictures against LIC, but rejected Rohini's claim was rejected by its order dated 26 July 2005.  
     
    Rohini then approached a Consumer Forum and signed a special power of attorney for Mr M Y Patil to appear on her behalf in all Forums and Courts in this matter. On 10 April 2007, the Consumer Forum, while granting relief to Rohini, directed LIC to pay the sum assured with 9% interest from the date of repudiation and Rs5,000 as compensation and Rs2,000 as costs. 
     
    However, LIC filed an appeal before the State Commission. The state commission admitted the appeal but asked LIC to deposit Rs25,000 with the Commission. On 17 April 2008, Rohini, being a widow, filed an application for priority hearing before the commission through Mr Patil. On 16 June 2008, the State Commission, after hearing both the sides, dismissed appeal filed by LIC with a cost of Rs2,000. In both the Consumer Forum as well as the State Commission, LIC had claimed date of policy as 31 May 2003.
     
    Mr Patil, on behalf of Rohini, filed a caveat. He also gave a letter for payment but there was no response from LIC. He, then filed an execution application on 23 October 2008 before the District Consumer Forum in Mumbai. Meanwhile, without information, the LIC on 6 October 2008, filed a revision petition before the NCDRC in Delhi, where it claimed the date of policy as 5 June 2003. Citing a judgement by the Supreme Court in LIC vs Dharam Vir Anand, the insurance company obtained a stay order from the National Forum on 21 January 2009 on execution application and on depositing decree amount of Rs20.83 lakh. 
     
    After that Mr Patil filed four different applications on behalf of Rohini for expedited hearing, but these were dismissed by the NCDRC. Finally, Mr Patil met the registrar at NCDRC and requested that the case be brought on board for a hearing. On 26 May 2014, when it was finally heard, the two-member NCDRC bench was divided in its opinion. One member, Dr BC Gupta passed order in favour of Rohini, while the Presiding Member Justice KS Choudhari passed order in favour of LIC. The matter was then referred to another Bench. 
     
    On 26 November 2014, Justice VK Jain passed an order in favour of Rohini. Later on 1 December 2014, the revision petition filed by LIC was also dismissed with a cost of Rs25,000.
     
    Fearing that LIC would then file a petition in the Supreme Court, Mr Patil filed a caveat before the apex court. On 13 August 2015, LIC, as expected, filed a special leave petition against the order passed by NCDRC. Mr Patil says, "I completed due process of Supreme Court Rules and was then permitted to appear in person on behalf of respondent (Rohini). The case was listed and it was likely to be heard on 9 May 2016. However, LIC quietly managed to have the matter mentioned on 28 April 2016 before the Coram of Justice R Banumathi and Justice Uday Umesh Lalit.  Upon hearing the matter, it was ordered to be listed on 29 April 2016 before an appropriate Bench. On 29 April 2016, it was listed before the Bench of Justice Dipak Misra and Justice Shiva Kirti Singh. After hearing the matter, the Bench dismissed the petition."
     
    Mr Patil, then filed application for reopening the execution proceedings in the District Forum on Rohini's behalf.  The Forum ordered to refund Rs25,000 deposited by LIC to be paid to Rohini. On 3 May 2016, Mr Patil sent a letter to Chairman of LIC to settle the claim through single cheque and also procure deposits made by the insurance company in Courts at Mumbai and Delhi through its offices. But, Mr Patil claimed, there was no response from LIC to his request.
     
    He then moved applications before the District Forum as well as NCDRC to receive deposited amounts of Rs25,000 and Rs20.83 lakh, respectively. Rohini finally received a cheque of Rs21.08 lakh, from the Consumer forums, bringing to an end a saga that perseverence and a good activist to support you can eventually win the day. However, very few people have the courage to fight all the way to the apex court.
  • Like this story? Get our top stories by email.

    User

    COMMENTS

    Silloo Marker

    3 years ago

    Rohini Singh is indeed a brave person to have carried on her fight for justice from LIC for so many years. However, Mr. M.Y. Patil, who helped this lady to fight this long battle, truly deserves public recognition for his excellent work.

    Mahesh S Bhatt

    3 years ago

    Its sad that a Widow & Mother who lost is son in suicide and cancer had to go through.I have always called Insurance Agents as Yam Dut's who donot support after death..But after 11 years if its success the challenge is time & speed of Justice & systems NAMO Mahesh

    Mahesh S Bhatt

    3 years ago

    Its sad that a Widow & Mother who lost is son in suicide and cancer had to go through.I have always called Insurance Agents as Yam Dut's who donot support after death..But after 11 years if its success the challenge is time & speed of Justice & systems NAMO Mahesh

    NITIN PATIL

    3 years ago

    REMINDS us of the famous Roche v/s Adams case ! Mr. Patil deserves kudos and should continue doing the good work !

    GLN Prasad

    3 years ago

    I never blame any PSU including LIC. The crooks if any are those who gives such legal advises to them for their fees. Some one should file RTI Application and ask LIC as to the total amount paid by them for this single litigation.

    Vinod Poptani

    3 years ago

    Their is lot of lack of knowledge in both the sides specially in LIC the insurer as well as the policy holder but in this case My sincere Salutation to Mr. Patil who took this challenge the face the fight for eleven years finally lady gets justice

    Deb

    3 years ago

    Yet another evidenc that LIC is one of biggest state-sponsored crooks in teh country. They are the biggest missellers of "insurance policies" which rob poor people of their hard earned money and routinely use their power to reject genuine claims of their customers. The Indian government happily looks the other way becuase of the fat dividend cheques it earns.
    My respect to Mr. Patil for fighting it out!

    REPLY

    Vijay Dadoo

    In Reply to Deb 3 years ago

    This sort of high handedness is very common for LIC and 23 other Life Insurance Companies. The companies in the interest of getting business misguide the customers, hiding the known laws, and the sufferers are only the policy holders. I have been grossly misled by ICICI bank officials together with the ICICI Prudential Officers. SUrprisingly, no one is caring for the customers right up to Chairperson ICICI Prudential. Even the Government is not making rules with clarity, and the ICICI Prudential would never explain to their customers. I have been given Single Premium 3 policies of Rs. 4,50,000/- each by Branch Manager ICICI Haridwar, who was accompanied by ICICI Prudential Officers. Now, I am being told that the entire sum including the amount put in Rs. 13,50,000/-, whatever received shall be added to my income for the year of receipt.CLEAR CASE OF DOUBLE TAXATION ALSO, for which there are no listeners.Can I expect the IRDA or Finance Ministry to take cognigence, failing which, I shall be doomed.

    B. Yerram Raju

    3 years ago

    Hearty congratulations to Mr M.Y. Patil for his patient fight for eleven years. Something is patently wrong with our processes almost in every sector. No case gets resolved in good time. Is it not time to get into correcting such processes to ensure speedy justice? Is it enough if we merely consolidate a few hundred laws or remove the archaic laws? The ratio of population to judges in this vast country is very disparate.

    REPLY

    Vijay Dadoo

    In Reply to B. Yerram Raju 3 years ago

    I agree. If he had not fought, the lady would have doomed.

    GLN Prasad

    3 years ago

    What a great contribution. Deserves high appreciation for perseverance . The minimum costs might have been more than Rs.1 lakh and if it was entrusted, he should have charged minimum Rs5 lakhs from widow for the proceedings. Happy to know still good and kind persons are surviving in the world. (I do not know whether Shri Patil is related personally to her.)

    sunil

    3 years ago

    The real hero is MY Patil.May his tribe increases.

    prgadigi2001

    3 years ago

    Not just courage, even lot of money to bear the legal expenses is required to go up to SC. Fortunately the lady, in this case, had the support of noble activist to fight at minimum expenses.

    REPLY

    Ifi Ngo

    In Reply to prgadigi2001 3 years ago

    LIC needs shake up

    We are listening!

    Solve the equation and enter in the Captcha field.
      Loading...
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email
    Close

    To continue


    Please
    Sign Up or Sign In
    with

    Email

    BUY NOW

    online financial advisory
    Pathbreakers
    Pathbreakers 1 & Pathbreakers 2 contain deep insights, unknown facts and captivating events in the life of 51 top achievers, in their own words.
    online financia advisory
    The Scam
    24 Year Of The Scam: The Perennial Bestseller, reads like a Thriller!
    Moneylife Online Magazine
    Fiercely independent and pro-consumer information on personal finance
    financial magazines online
    Stockletters in 3 Flavours
    Outstanding research that beats mutual funds year after year
    financial magazines in india
    MAS: Complete Online Financial Advisory
    (Includes Moneylife Online Magazine)