MAM
Automotive fuel, fitness and sports outlets saw aggressive TV ad volume growth in Q1-19: TAM
MUMBAI: Services and personal healthcare saw a dip in TV ad volumes in the first quarter of 2019 as compared to Q1 2018. While they maintained their positions in the top five super categories, their ad volumes decreased with an indexed figure of 12 per cent and 6 per cent respectively.
The topmost super category was food & beverages, with 19 per cent share in ad volumes. It climbed up a spot from the previous consecutive quarter with a 7 per cent indexed growth. It was followed by personal care & hygiene (19 per cent), services (11 per cent), household products (7 per cent), and personal healthcare (6 per cent).
The report also highlighted the top categories under these super categories based on their ad volumes on TV.
Consumer durables sector
In consumer durables, wires and cables became one of the topmost advertisers, showing 3.8 times growth in ad volumes as compared to Q1’18. Lighting products also showed an indexed growth of 38 per cent.
|
Rank |
Top five Categories – Q1'19 |
Top five Categories – Q1'18 |
Indexed Growth in Q1'19 |
|
|
1 |
Lighting Products |
Fans |
138 |
|
|
2 |
Fans |
Inverters |
49 |
|
|
3 |
Wires & Cables |
Water Purifiers/Filters |
378 (3.8 times) |
|
|
4 |
Water Purifiers/Filters |
Lighting Products |
57 |
|
|
5 |
Thermowares |
Air Conditioners |
168 |
The top five advertisers in the category were Polycab Wires, Microtek International, Philips Electronics India, V Guard Industries, and Orient Electric. The top five brands were V-Guard Wires, Orient Aeroslim, Livfast Inverters and Batteries, Microtek Jumbo Ups, and Usha Goodbye Dust Fan.
Auto Sector
In the auto sector, corporate auto recorded an 11 times growth, automotive fuel showed a staggering growth of 5568 times in Q1’19 from the same quarter in the previous year.
|
Rank |
Top five Categories – Q1'19 |
Top five Categories – Q1'18 |
Indexed Growth in Q1'19 |
|
1 |
Cars |
Two Wheelers |
117 |
|
2 |
Two Wheelers |
Cars |
40 |
|
3 |
Corporate-Auto |
Tyres |
1095 (11 Times) |
|
4 |
Tyres |
Commercial Vehicles |
92 |
|
5 |
Automotive Fuel |
Tractors |
556738 (5568 Times) |
The top five advertisers were Maruti Suzuki India, TVS Motor Company, Bajaj Auto, Mahindra & Mahindra, and Kia Motors Corporation while top brands were Mahindra XUV 300, Bajaj Auto, Nissan Kicks, Kia, and Jeep Compass.
Retail sector
Retail outlets-fitness/sports noted a whopping growth of 267 times in terms of ad volumes in Q1’19 as compared to Q1’18.
|
Rank |
Top five Categories – Q1'19 |
Top five Categories – Q1'18 |
Indexed Growth in Q1'19 |
|
1 |
Retail Outlets-Clothing/Textiles/ |
Retail Outlets-Clothing/Textiles/ |
89 |
|
2 |
Retail Outlets-Electronics/Durables |
Retail Outlets-Departmental Stores |
142 |
|
3 |
Retail Outlets-Departmental Stores |
Retail Outlets-Electronics/Durables |
60 |
|
4 |
Retail Outlets-Fitness/Sports |
Retail Outlets-Home/Interiors/ |
26655 (267 Times) |
|
5 |
Retail Outlets-Home/Interiors/ |
Retail Outlets-Medical/Pharmacy Stores |
120 |
The top five advertisers were Reliance Retail, The Chennai Silks Group, Vasanth & Co, Saravana Stores, and Mission Sports & Fitness, and the top five brands were Reliance Digital, Vasanth & Co, Reliance Trends, The Chennai Silks Goddess Collections, and The Chennai Silks.
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.
