MAM
Infectious Advertising hires Divesh Mehta and Kiran Salkar for key roles
MUMBAI: Infectious Advertising has just doubled its dose of creative and strategic medicine and the side effect could be potent campaigns. The independent agency has onboarded two industry veterans: Divesh Mehta as associate vice president planning and Kiran Salkar as creative director for art, bolstering both its brand strategy muscle and design flair.
Mehta, who clocks in nearly 15 years in marketing communications, was a founding member of an omni-channel apparel brand that shook up casual wear retail. His advertising innings have spanned BFSI, finance, hospitality, pharma and heavy industry, all with the belief that “the right strategic intervention can transform client business.” On his move, Mehta said Infectious’ work is “both rooted and refreshing the kind of energy I want to be part of.”
Salkar also brings over 15 years of adland experience, leading campaigns for marquee brands like Lux, Sunsilk, BMW, Tata Motors, Parle, Taj, SBI and Orra. An illustrator at heart with a photographer’s sensibility, he’s known for marrying bold aesthetics with brand storytelling. “I’m excited to join Infectious and look forward to doing some kickass work,” he said, adding that he’s been following the agency’s work “for a while” and likes what he’s seen.
Co-founders Nisha Singhania and Ramanuj Shastry called the duo’s arrival a shot in the arm: “Both bring the attitude and skill sets needed to take Infectious to the next level.” With Mehta’s strategic scalpel and Salkar’s visual sizzle, the agency looks set to turn more heads and maybe win a few more awards in the months ahead.
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.
