MAM
Rural, tier 2 & 3 cities to drive the next leg of growth: Ashish Bhasin, DAN
NEW DELHI: After the sluggish growth in the previous few quarters, which is now further worsened by the Covid2019 pandemic, DAN CEO APAC and chairman India Ashish Bhasin is now bullish about the economic possibilities of the country. He feels that the worst has already happened and from here on it is going to be a month-on-month recovery path for the industry, he shared with Indiantelevision.com during a virtual fireside chat with founder CEO and editor-in-chief Anil Wanvari.
Bhasin noted that he doesn’t see a V-shape recovery happening but there are certain markets, which have already started signs of growth and will continue to do so, including automobile and FMCG.
“FMCG was doing well during the lockdown too as it came under the essential services category and then also a function of sales-and-demand, managed pretty well. Another sector that has started showing signs of recovery is the automobile industry. I feel that post-pandemic more people will be preferring own transport and I see a rise in sales of motorbikes happening. Tractor sales did pretty well too, over the past few months and that will continue to do so,” he insisted.
He is also pinning his hopes for growth in rural and tier 2, tier 3 areas. “The harvest has been good this time and also the sowing season was pretty positive. Though the agriculture sector just contributes to the 15-16 per cent of the GDP, it will play a significant role in pulling the numbers up in the coming quarters. Also, more dispensible income in the hands of people will create a good supply-demand cycle. I see rural areas and tier 2, tier 3 cities driving the next leg of our growth.”
Bhasin pointed out that in the rest of the industries, demand might not be a big problem but the struggles will be on the part of restoring the supply side logistics that have been badly hurt because of the pandemic. He sees sectors like cinema, real estate, and non-digital education entities taking quite some time to revive from here.
“It’s not like a switch that goes off during the lockdown and is suddenly up as the restrictions are lifted. One, it will take its own time for the labourers to come back, the production to start, and then supplies picking up. Even then, it is not going to be a straight way, there will be hiccups with cases spiking up or maybe demand going down,” he elaborated.
He stated that the pandemic has pushed the country behind by 2-2.5 years and it will take time till 2022 for the economy, as a function of various markets cumulatively, to reach 2019 level.
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.
