MAM
Ambience Publicis names Anirban Mukherjee as vice president, planning
MUMBAI: Ambience Publicis has roped in Anirban Mukherjee as vice president, planning. Currently, Mukherjee heads planning at McCann Erickson.
Chief strategy officer Partha Sinha, “At Publicis we are not interested in a planning discipline. We are interested in a planning product. Anirban is one of the few people in this industry who can actively contribute in developing a new point of view.” He further added,” I have known Anirban for a while and have high regard for his refined thinking. He will surely strengthen our team and more importantly strengthen our purpose.”
Mukherjee said, “What excites me most about Publicis is their respect for original thinking. My conversations with Partha have been about building a reputation based on quality of thought and I look forward to working with Ambience Publicis.”
Anirbhan brings with him 14 years of experience as he started his career at JWT, Kolkata in 1993. He later joined McCann at Kolkata and had a 10 year long stint with them, informs an official release.
His current assignment with McCann as executive planning director leading a team and handling businesses such as Unilever (Pears, Liril, Vaseline), Marico (Saffola, Parachute), J&J (Stayfree), Tata Indicom and brands like Coca Cola, Reckitt (Harpic), Nescafe, Bacardi, Motorola and Perfetti.
Brands
Maharashtra panel orders Lodha to refund Rs 5 crore to homebuyers
Consumer court flags unfair practices in long-running property dispute case
MUMBAI: In a sharp rebuke to one of India’s biggest real estate players, the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has directed Macrotech Developers to refund nearly Rs 5 crore to a senior citizen couple, Uttam and Anindita Chatterjee. The ruling, delivered on March 13, 2026, calls out the developer for “deficiency in service” and “unfair trade practices”, bringing closure to a dispute that has stretched over a decade.
The case traces back to 2015, when the couple booked a 3-BHK flat at World Towers in Lower Parel for Rs 12.22 crore, with possession promised within a year. What followed was a series of changes that complicated matters. After deciding to exit the project, they were persuaded to shift to a 4-BHK in another development priced at Rs 8 crore, with delivery scheduled for 2018. However, within months, the price was allegedly increased to Rs 10 crore. After demonetisation reshaped the market, similar flats were reportedly being offered at lower prices, but the couple were not given the benefit.
Despite paying over Rs 2.83 crore, the couple neither received possession nor clarity. Instead, in 2018, the developer unilaterally cancelled the booking, retained part of the amount as earnest money, and argued that the buyers were investors rather than consumers. The commission rejected this claim, observing that casual references to “investment” do not take away consumer rights when the purchase intent is residential.
The bench also held that the developer could not penalise buyers for payment delays while failing to meet its own delivery commitments. It noted the lack of formal documentation for revised terms and termed the prolonged retention of funds without delivering a home as exploitative.
As part of its order, the commission directed the developer to refund Rs 2.83 crore paid by the couple, along with interest at 10 per cent per annum, amounting to around Rs 2.12 crore. In addition, Rs 1 lakh has been awarded for mental agony and Rs 50,000 towards litigation costs, taking the total payout to over Rs 5 crore. The developer has been asked to comply within two months.
For now, the ruling serves as a reminder that in real estate, shifting terms and delayed promises can carry a significant cost.
