MAM
Tata Nexarc onboards Kapil Ohri as head of performance marketing
Mumbai: Tata Nexarc on Tuesday announced the appointment of Kapil Ohri as head of performance marketing and customer success. He brings over 15 years of experience in digital media across digital transformation, D2C, media planning, programmatic advertising, and content marketing, working for companies like Mindshare, Ogilvy, Nnnow.com, Afaqs etc.
Ohri shared about joining his new role at Tata Nexarc via a LinkedIn post. He posted, A “New Start,” After several years in the CPG sector, it’s time to reboot. It’s time for a “New Start” and become part of Tata Business Hub team as Head of Performance Marketing & Customer Success (Engagement Marketing). It’s time for a fresh mission – Enable emerging businesses to grow, solve challenges and optimize processes. And with this change, I have also moved out of Delhi NCR. Namaskara Bengaluru.”
Prior to joining Tata Nexarc, Ohri was the deputy general manager at Dabur India. He joined the company as head of digital marketing.
Ohri founded ‘afaqs! Campus,’ a digital marketing education venture that has coached over 2,000 marketing professionals from leading companies and institutes. He is the author of the series of books titled “The Curious Digital Marketer.”
His LinkedIn profile read, “He has won around 35 awards (including team awards as well) at national and APAC level for digital marketing work for brands.”
The Top 100 Digital Marketer Awards in India featured Ohri twice. In 2020, he received the Top 100 Smartest Digital Marketer award from ET NOW & World Marketing Congress. He has also won the title of Top 100 Digital Marketer from Paul Writer PluralSight in 2017.
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.
