MAM
Photo finish for Cartoon Network’s brand promotion Toon Cricket
Cartoon Network’s brand popularisation drive Toon Cricket 2002 has scored some more brownie points for the channel this year.
If the network’s figures of over 30,000 spectators are an indication, the exercise is certainly reaping rich dividends – the audience has grown since the inaugural match in 1999, when the combined audience for the Mumbai and Delhi matches hovered around 24,000. According to an official release, the match held in Mumbai last Sunday ended in a tie, with the two teams Jerry’s Racers and Tom’s Chasers score 28 runs in 2.3 overs for the loss of two wickets each.
As part of the initiative, viewers were asked to help the toon captains and umpires regarding important decisions such as bowling order and the selection of the Toon of the Match. Promotional and marketing initiatives that the channel used to increase awareness about the event included an online contest where free passes were given to kids who correctly chose the captains. The channel had also roped in cricketers like Saurav Ganguly for hoardings across the city. The promo line used was ‘It’s a mad game, but someone’s got to play it’.
A Toon Cricket Mobile also did the rounds of city schools on the days preceding the match where one could catch a glimpse of the characters undergoing net practice..The event was presented by Pepsi and co-sponsored by Joyco (Solano), TI Cycles, Colgate, ACT II Popcorn, Cadbury Gems and Boost.
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.
