MAM
Piramal Healthcare hands over media AOR to Madison Media Sigma
MUMBAI: On a winning spree, Madison Media has added Piramal Healthcare‘s media AOR to its kitty. The account was won in a multi agency pitch where other agencies like OMD and MPG also participated. The estimated size of the account is Rs 70 crore.
Lodestar handled Piramal‘s account previously.
On winning the account, Madison Media Sigma COO Vanita Keswani says, “We are delighted with this new win and are looking forward to a long and mutually beneficial relationship”.
Piramal Healthcare has aggressive plans for OTC category and has recently launched skin creams under its Lacto Calamine brand name. The company also plans to launch several other brands as well in the healthcare space.
Piramal Healthcare consumer products COO Kedar Rajadnye says, “Given our ambitious plans, we wanted to enhance our current capabilities in media strategy & buying front and hence looked out for partners who could create a higher value on this aspect. Madison Media fitted very well in the requirement & our scheme of things as we were very happy to see their approach being very similar to our mindset.”
Madison Media has recently won a host of new businesses including Raymond, Epic Channel, Maxx Mobile, McCain Foods, Ruchi Soya, Max India‘s corporate account, Café Coffee Day, Radikal Rice and Crompton Greaves.
With the media agency handling media planning and buying for blue chip clients including Airtel, Godrej, Cadbury/Kraft, ITC, General Motors, Marico, McDonald‘s TVS, Levis, SpiceJet, Domino‘s, Bharti AXA, Max Life Insurance, Asian Paints, Pidilite, Tata Salt, Acer, Crompton Greaves, Dish TV, Times Television Network, Indian Oil, Enamor Lingerie, Gowardhan Dairy, Café Coffee Day and many others, the gross billing of Madison Media is about Rs 3000 crore.
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.
