Raheja Developers Limited - Scoplots

Recommendation: Upheld | Medium: General Public

The ASCI had approached the advertiser (yourselves) for their response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The Advertiser was offered an opportunity for personal meeting/telecon with the ASCI Secretariat which they did not avail, but submitted their written response. The advertiser in their response questioned the rules and regulations of ASCI’s operation. Further, they claimed to have not understood the background of the complaint. Although the ASCI Secretariat addressed their queries, the advertiser had, however, not responded prior to the prescribed due date for this complaint. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the print advertisement and observed that the advertiser did not provide any response to the specific grievances of the complainant. Regarding the advertiser’s comment on ASCI’s jurisdiction, the CCC referred to the judgement by the Hon’ble Supreme Court titled “Common Cause (A Regd Society) v Union of India and Ors”, which affirmed and recognised the self-regulatory mechanism put in place by self-regulatory bodies as an effective pre-emptive step to statutory provisions in the sphere of media regulation. The grievance redressal platform provided by self-regulatory bodies, therefore, function as the first step for aggrieved consumers against content in the media which might not be in line with the existing laws. The CCC also advised that the advertiser should take cognizance of the MoU the Department of Consumer Affairs has entered into with ASCI to carry out ‘Suo Moto’ surveillance of potentially misleading advertisements. The CCC observed that the advertiser was promoting a commercial plot scheme of shop cum office and positioned the property as one ideal for shops, offices, restaurants, etc. Further, the disclaimer indicates that “SCO Market is being developed by Sh. Bhoop Singh & others in collaborations with collaborator company…”. Prima facie the advertisement indicates that the said property was developed by the Haryana Government. However, the said property was only guided by the Haryana Government’s New Commercial Plotted Colony Policy. Based on this assessment, the CCC concluded that the claim, “Haryana Government’s New Commercial Plot Scheme of Shop Cum Office (SCOs)” is false and misleading by ambiguity and implication. The claim is likely to cause widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers. The print advertisement contravened Chapters I.1, I.4 and I.5 of the ASCI Code. The complaint was UPHELD.