Live Post
JD(U) under Nitish decides to become part of NDA, denies split in party
Customs arrests Air India cabin crew for smuggling ganja
Government, RBI in talks to shore up PSU bank capital
Bihar flood toll mounts to 153, 17 districts affected
IndiGo cancels 84 flights over engine issues
Trai gets tough on call drops; slaps penalty of upto Rs 10 lakh
Yogi Adityanath targets 'Yuvraj' Rahul Gandhi: 'Will not permit Gorakhpur to become picnic spot'
Shivraj to lead BJP in 2018 election: Amit Shah

Asci upholds complaints against 98 out of 159 ads in June

MUMBAI: In June 2016, ASCI’s Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) upheld complaints against 98 out of 159 advertisements.

Out of 98 advertisements against which complaints were upheld, 39 belonged to the education category, 25 to the healthcare & personal care category, followed by 11 in the food & beverages category, six in e-commerce category and 17 from other categories.

Health and Personal Care

The CCC found the following claims in health care & personal care product or service advertisements of 25 advertisers to be either misleading or false or not adequately/scientifically substantiated and hence violating ASCI’s Code.

Some of the health care products or services advertisements also contravened provisions of the Drug & Magic Remedies Act and Chapter 1.1 and III.4 of the ASCI Code.

Complaints against the following advertisements were upheld.

1. Godrej Consumer Products (Cinthol Deo Stick): The ads claim, ‘3X longer’ is not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and exaggeration as the advertisement indicates the product to be 3X better than all deodorants (all formats), while the product has been tested against only two marketed products. These products do not represent the major market leaders/players and all the deo product formats.

2. Athena Life Sciences (Hair for Sure): The ads claim, “Meeri maniye main ek trichologist – baaloan ka doctor, isiliye I recommend hair for sure,” of a trichologist endorsing the product was not substantiated and was considered to be misleading by implication as the World Medical Trichologists Association (WMTA) certificate submitted by the advertiser only supports product quality and the certificate categorically states that it is not an endorsement for the product claim. Also, the claim, “Isme hai rutexil – Ek breakthrough comprehensive regrowth complex. Effectively regrows hair from the roots,” was not adequately substantiated with clinical evidence. The claim, when read in conjunction with the visuals in the TVC showing significant regrowth of hair on bald patches, was considered to be grossly misleading. The supers in the Hindi TVC were not in the same language as the audio of the TVC.

3. Athena Life Sciences (Hair for Sure): The ad’s claim, ‘‘stop hair loss” was considered to be false as some hair fall is natural and cannot be stopped. The claim was misleading by exaggeration. Furthermore, for the advertisement’s claims, “Hair regrowth treatment” and “Begin Hair growth,” the in vitro data submitted regarding the constituents stated that the constituents do help in hair growth. However, there was no evidence that this data is extrapolatable to in vivo situation to support hair regrowth claim. The change in Anagen/Telogen ratio does not essentially translate into growth of hair into bald areas. Based on the photograding scores, these claims were not substantiated with efficacy of the product and are misleading.

Also the ads claim, “Reutexil-The new era in hair regrowth treatment,” was not substantiated with clinical evidence and is misleading. In addition, the advertisement’s claims, “Growth Stimulant,” “Anti Fibrotic,” “Anti Inflammatory” and “anti Oxidative,” are based on ingredient specific in vitro data. These claims were not substantiated for in vivo situation for the ingredient levels present in the product. The claims being presented on the pack as a product efficacy attribute were misleading by ambiguity and implication.

4. Athena Life Sciences (Hair for Sure): The ads claim, “Extensive In-Vitro and Clinical Trials have been conducted on Hair for Sure Hair Tonic to validate the efficacy of the regimen to regrow hair,” was not adequately substantiated for the “Regrowth” aspect of the claim for in vivo situation. The claim stating that the studies were conducted to “validate the efficacy of the regimen to regrow hair” was considered to be misleading by ambiguity and implication. Furthermore the advertisement’s claim, “A 3.45 X times better in improving hair growth when compared to Market Leading Hair Regrowth Product priced at Rs 650,” is incorrect to say that the mean photograding score of hair for sure is 3.45 times more on day 30th and 2.48 times more at the end of 60 day than the market leader tested against (Livon).

Also, the ads claim, “Hair for Sure Increased Anagen/Telogen ratio significantly by 50.8 per cent more compared to market leading brand in 45 days. Hair for Sure increases A/T ratio significantly 73.4 per cent from base line in 45 days,” is incorrect to say that the increase in the mean score of A/T ratio due to Hair for Sure is significantly more than the comparative treatment. In addition, the claim, “Hair for Sure increased percentage of Anagen Hair (growing hair) by 16.5 per cent in 45 days. Human scalp has average hair count of 100,000. Considering this after applying Hair for Sure – Hair Tonic for 45 days twice a day, 16,500 (16.5 per cent) non-growing hair would start re-growing,” was considered to be misleading as the increase of 16.5% in anagen number cannot be interpreted as non-growing hair start re-growing. The advertisement’s claim, “It is first in India to be approved by World Medical Trichologist Association (WMTA)” was considered to be misleading by omission, ambiguity and implication as the WMTA certificate only supports product quality and the certificate categorically states that it is not an endorsement for the product claim.

The ads claim, “clinically proven to help hair growth, clinically proven to accelerate hair growth, and clinically proven to stimulate Hair Growth” are based on the photograding scores, these claims were not substantiated with efficacy of the product and are misleading. Also, the advertisement’s claim, “No. 1 hair regrowth treatment as on Amazon”, was not adequately substantiated and was considered to be misleading by ambiguity as this claim was based on product entries as available on Amazon. However, no authentic evidence for the same was provided.

5. Athena Life Science (Just for Moms Maternity Stretch Marks Prevention Lotion): The ads claim, “Tested and Gynaecologist approved” was not substantiated with relevant data as the test was for skin irritation potential carried out in males and non-pregnant female subjects. The claim was considered to be misleading by implication that the testing is for product efficacy. Also, the ads claim, “Helps reduce stretch marks” was not substantiated and is misleading.

6. Patanjali Ayurved (Patanjali Dant Kanti): The ads claims, “Foreign companies made fun of our natural tooth cleaning sources like datun, charcoal, neem, haldi and salt. For years they kept playing with our dental health by selling their chemical rich toothpastes. These renowned brands are now emotionally blackmailing people with benefits of neem, haldi and salt….” were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claims unfairly denigrated the entire class/category of toothpastes.

7. Aksir Dandan Tooth Powder: The claims in the ad (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Cures the pyorrhoea, tooth pain, tooth cavity, swelling in gums, bleeding gums, sensation of cold and hot water immediately,” were not substantiated and are misleading.

8. Razorbill (Diabwell): The ad’s claim, “Treat Diabetes with ayurvedic Diabwell,” was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, the reference to treatment of Diabetes which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

9. Razorbill (Razorslim): The ad’s claim, “Use ayurvedic Razorslim for Effective Fat loss,” was not substantiated with clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product and is misleading. The visual showing the images of before and after the treatment were considered to be misleading. Also, specific to the claim made as part of product testimonial stating miraculous weight loss of 24 kilograms for an over-weight (94 kilograms) lady in A couple of months implying treatment for obesity, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

10. Ayurwin Pharmaceuticals (Ayurwin Nutrislim+ Powder): The ad’s claims, “Now keep your body Slim with Ayurwin Nutrislim+. Complete Slimming Solution to look slim & attractive” and “Nutrislim+ is an effective natural ayurvedic product which has no side effects and is safe to use,” were not substantiated and are misleading.

11. Nurture Health Care (Bgainer Capsule): The claims in the ad (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Now it is easy to gain weight up to 10 kilos in two months” and “Medicine prepared by experienced ayurvedic doctors from some rare herbs,” were not substantiated and are misleading.

12. OPTM Health Care (OPTM’s Phytomedicine): The claims in the ad (in Bengali) as translated into English, “The only solution for knee, shoulder and waist pain is OPTM’s phytomedicine,” “Phytomedicine discovered by the OPTM,” “Phytomedicine, developed by OPTM’s chief research officer and renowned researchers, is applied in on the skin in a special technique” and “the, Phytomedicine that has been invented by OPTM, is used in specific dosage to aid the reconstruction of bones and muscles,” were not substantiated and are misleading.

13. MedsOnWay Solution (MedsOnWay – offer of attractive discounts): The ad claims the MRP of the product (Threptin 275 gm biscuits) as Rs 295.00, when the actual printed MRP on the product is the same as being offered at the discounted price of Rs 250.75 (15% off). The claim is false, distorts facts and is misleads the consumers as to the actual discount being offered.

14. Facilitas Healthcare: The ad’s claim, “Enjoy quitting smoking with innovative soft laser therapy of Facilitas,” was inadequately substantiated and is misleading.

15. Pain Clinic (Dr. Sarvesh Jain): The claims in the ad (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Percutaneous Nueroplasty of Genicular Nerve of Knee (Get Permanent Relief from Knee pain)” and “Discolysis & Epidural Injection (More successful than operation, 100% success rate),” were not substantiated and are misleading.

16. DoctorInsta (DoctorInsta.com): The claims in the advertisement, “Consult the best and brightest doctors” and “Goodbye Sexual Problems” were not substantiated and were misleading by gross exaggeration.

17. JHS Svengaard Laboratories Ltd. (Aquawhite Toothpaste) – 2 complaints: In the ad, the dialogues between the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law have double meaning, crude and sexually suggestive, which are likely in the light of generally prevailing standards of decency and propriety, to cause grave and widespread offence. Also, in the context of an advertisement for toothpaste, deliberate use of such dialogues used in the advertisement is distasteful.

18. Fair Pharma: The claims in the ad (in Telegu) as translated into English, that “their medicines can treat Kidney diseases, as an alternative for dialysis, within 50 days (+ 3 months),” “Life threatening viral disease within 100 days,” “Eliminate Hepatitis B/C, Human Papilloma Virus from blood which cannot be eliminated by chemotherapy/radiation or surgery. Within 50 days” and “Rheumatic valvular disease within 100 days,” were not substantiated and are grossly misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claim implying treatment for Rheumatism, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

19. Herbo Remedies Research Center (Piles Boon): The claims in the ad (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Complete Removal of Piles” and “Very much easy and beneficial treatment in 5/10 days,” were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims implying treatment/cure for Piles, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated Schedule J of The Drugs and Cosmetic Act, 1940 and Rules, 1945.

20. Madhur Ayurveda (Madhur Range of Products): The claims in the advertisement (in Gujarati), as translated into English, “Increase height by adopting ayurveda. If you find no difference, or get your money back,” was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to increase in height, the advertisement is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

21. Win-Up Herbal Power Capsule: The claims in the ad (in Hindi), as translated into English, “Win-Up – Win-Up is very effective in old age and weakness due to diabetes, Hand and foot numbness, childhood mistakes etc. Because it is made up of pure shilajit, Abhrak bhasm, lohbhasm, etc. that keep away every kind of weakness,” “Herbal Power Capsules,” “Safe And Harmless,” “Increase Agility, Passion,” “Use ‘Time-On’ For Wet Dreams And Desired Time” and “For Men Only,” were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, the claims, “Increase Agility, Nimbleness, Passion,” “Use Time-On in case of Wet Dreams And for Desired Time” and “For Men Only,” read in conjunction with the advertisement visual imply that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

22. Abhay Ayurvedic Pharmacy (Abhay Medari): The claims in the ad (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “Abhay Medari – without exercise or dieting you can reduce 10 to 15 kilograms of weight in three months, by taking slim fit Syrup and Tablets to reduce obesity,” were not substantiated with clinical evidence or proof of efficacy for the product and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims implying treatment for obesity, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

23. Herbal Clinic: The claims in the ad (in Gujarati), as translated into English, “Japani Pattinuma Angavarthak machine is used to remove the defects of small size male organ, bent organ, thin organ, absence of sperm, incapability to produce children, premature ejaculation, ejaculation in sleep, impotency, aversion to sex, etc.,” “with 30 day course of medicines spray, 8 GB memory card and Japani Pattinuma Angavarthak machine free,” were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the claims related to the product benefit read in conjunction with the advertisement visual implies that the product is meant for enhancement of sexual pleasure, which is in Breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

Further, the claims in the advertisement (in Gujarati) as translated into English, “medicines for making breasts more attractive. In 28 days with company’s medicines you will have your breasts more attractive, well-shaped, well-toned and round,” “Price Rs 1575 only. The machine for breasts treatment free,” were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims related to breast development, “In 28 days with company’s medicines you will have your breasts more attractive, well-shaped, well-toned and round,” and visual in the advertisement implying bust enhancement, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

Also, the claims in the ad (in Gujarati), as translated in English, “for increasing height for short size young gents and ladies. Do not get disheartened. With several years’ research by our experts our company has an unbeatable formula of ayurvedic herbs to increase the height. Medicines course costs Rs 1575,” were not substantiated and are misleading. Also, the claims related to the height increase read in conjunction with the advertisement visual, are in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

24. Mata Anupama Devi Metabolic Clinic (Metabolic Remedy): The claims in the ad (in Hindi) as translated into English, “get rid of diabetes” and “get rid of cancer, diabetes type 1 and 2, kidney failure, and other Autoimmune diseases with metabolic treatment,” were not substantiated with clinical evidence, and are misleading. Also, specific to the claims implying treatment/cure for diabetes type 1 and 2, cancer, kidney, the advertisements are in breach of the law as they violate The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

25. Nadipathy Global Centre (Nadipathy Treatment): The claims in the ad (in Telugu) as translated into English, “Before Height- 159 cm,” “One Inch height growth in four days treatment of Nadipathy,” “After 10 minutes – 159.5 cm,” “One Inch height growth in four days treatment of Nadipathy,” were not substantiated and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, specific to the claims related to treatment for height increase along with the visual shown, the advertisement is in breach of the law as it violated The Drugs & Magic Remedies Act.

Food And Beverages

1. Patanjali Ayurved Limited (Patanjali Juices): The ad’s claim, “Will you still drink expensive fruit juices with less fruit pulp or drink cheaper Patanjali fruit juices with more fruit pulp for good health and more saving,” was not substantiated and is grossly misleading. Also, the claims unfairly denigrated the class/category of fruit juices.

2. Patanjali Ayurved Limited (Patanjali Energy Bar): The claim in the ad “Chocolate ki bhuri aadat se chutkara payein,” was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, the claim unfairly denigrated the entire class/category of chocolates.

3. MSG All Trading International (MSG Products): The claims (in Hindi) that “all other food items contain poison and pesticides” were not substantiated with supporting evidence. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration and implication that consumption of other food is dangerous or hazardous, and unfairly denigrated the category of food items.

4. Kamla Kant & Company LLP (Rajshree Pan Masala): The ad of Rajshree Pan Masala features Anu Kapoor – a celebrity from the field of cinema for a product which has a health warning “Pan Masala is injurious to health” and which cannot be purchased or used by minors. The celebrity in the advertisement would have a significant influence on minors who are likely to emulate the celebrity in using the product. Hence the advertisement contravened Chapter III.2 (e) of the ASCI Code, which specifically states that advertisements “Should not feature personalities from the field of sports and entertainment for products which, by law, require a health warning such as ‘Panmasala is injurious to health’ in their advertising or packaging.” Also, the supers/statutory warning in the Hindi TVC were not legible and not in the same language as the audio of the TVC.

5. Parle Products (Bakesmith Original English Marie biscuit): In the ad, quoting the story of a fictitious character and claiming the product to be “original English” Marie is misleading.
6. Gujarat Co-operative Milk Marketing Federation Limited (Amul Epic Choco Almond): The visual representation on the product packaging of Amul Epic Choco Almond was found misleading. The visual on the packaging shows the product core to be dark brown implying that the product contains more of chocolate whereas the core of the product is not as dark as depicted on the pack.

7. Organic India Pvt. Ltd. (Tulsi Green Tea): The ad’s claim, “Its rich antioxidants help prevent ageing,” was inadequately substantiated and is misleading. No clinical data was provided in support of this claim.

8. KLF Nirmal Industries (P) Ltd. (KLF Nirmal Virgin Coconut Oil): The ad’s claims, “Consuming two spoons daily increases your immunity, boosts energy, balances total cholesterol and helps manage weight,” were not substantiated with credible clinical or published scientific data and are misleading.

9. Shakti Industries (Rajdhani Oil): The claims in the ad (in Hindi) as translated into English, “It decreases the level of body cholesterol and protects from heart diseases,” “It has anti-bacterial, anti-fungal and anti-inflammatory qualities that are helpful in reducing the swelling of the stomach layer,” “Reduces the risk of Cancer” and “It reduces the joints pain along with skin and hair,” were not substantiated with clinical data and product efficacy data. Also, the claims were considered to be misleading.

10. Chemical Resources (Furocyst): The ad’s claims, “An Advanced Form of Ayurveda, merging nature and science,” “Clinically Evaluated,” and “U.S. Patented Ingredient,” were not substantiated. Also, the advertisement is misleading by ambiguity.

11. Chemical Resource (Furocyst): The ad’s claim, “A medical food furocyst (for management of PCOS, an endrocrine disorder experienced by women) makes it in the list of finalists to be awarded by Nutralngredients – USA in Geneva,” is not substantiated with evidence and is misleading.

Education

The CCC found following claims in the advertisements by 39 different advertisers were not substantiated and, thus, violated ASCI Guidelines for Advertising of Educational Institutions. Hence complaints against these advertisements were upheld.

1. LBS Institute of Management & Technology: The ad’s claim, “Excellent Placements in Top Companies for last 19 years,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

2. Hierank Business School: The ad’s claim, “B-School with Record Placement between Four Lacs & Eight Lacs Package,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

3. ITM Business School: The ad’s claims, “Highest Package: Rs 13.50 lakh,” and “Average CTC: Rs 6.80 lakh,” were not substantiated and are misleading.

4. IMS Unison University: The ad’s claim, “Over 90% Placement consistently in last three years,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

5. Indore Indira Group (Indore Indira Business School): The ad’s claim, “200+ Recruiters, 2000+ Placements Domestic, 150+ Placements Overseas,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

6. International Academy of Management & Entrepreneurship: The use of “100%” numerical claim is not relevant in the context of “assistance” being provided in “100% placement assistance” claim. The CCC concluded that the claim is misleading by implication.

7. Alliance University: The ad’s claim, “94% Placement offers,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

8. Coimbatore Institute Of Management And Technology: The ad’s claim, “95% of the students are placed in the academic year 2014-15,” was not substantiated with authentic supporting data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms and appointment letters received by the students) and is misleading. The advertisement did not indicate the total number of students in that class / batch.

9. Kaziranga University: The ad’s claim, “Three Tier Placement Assistance- International, National & Local,” was not substantiated with supporting data describing the modality of such assistance being provided and it’s utility and is misleading by ambiguity.

10. Techno India Business School: The advertisement’s claim, “99% placement in many MNC’s with packages over Rs 12 Lakh/US$ 85K per annum,” was not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students and appointment letters received by the students), nor any evidence to prove that the individual students were indeed given the salary offer. Also, the claim is misleading by ambiguity and implication.

11. KIIT University (KIIT School of Management): The ad’s claims, “98% placement,” “398 total offers” and “13.5 lakh highest salary in 2014-15,” were not substantiated with relevant data (such as detailed list of students who have been placed through their Institute, contact details of students for verification, enrolment forms, the batch size of the students, and appointment letters received by the students), nor any evidence to prove that the individual students were indeed given the salary offer. Also, the claims are misleading.
12. Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation (K L University): The ad’s claim, “Asia’s fastest growing University,” was not substantiated with any date to prove that the advertiser’s institute is indeed growing faster as compared to other similar institutes in India and Asia and is misleading by exaggeration.

13. Combined Counselling Board: The ad’s claim, “Get up to 100% scholarship under this scheme” was not substantiated and is misleading. Also, the website advertisement shows a picture of IIT, Mumbai, conveying this to be their campus which is false and grossly misleading and also the website address is made to appear like a government website with inclusion of nic.in, which is likely to mislead the consumers.

14. Rastriya Bal Vikas Samiti (Khajuraho Institute of Hotel Management and Technology): The claims in the ad (in Hindi) as translated in English, “100% Job Guarantee,” and “Within 90 days get A Job,” were not substantiated with details of batch size, enrolment forms, appointment letters and contact details of the students who got jobs. Also, the claims are misleading by exaggeration.

15. Jagran Education Foundation (Jagran Institute of Management & Mass Communication): The ad’s claim, “With 90% Attendance, Get Guaranteed Placement,” was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading by ambiguity.

16. Chanakya Ias Academy: The ad’s claim, “5 in Top 10 Rank 5,6,7,9 & 10 total Selections 353,” was not substantiated with authentic evidence and validation by an independent third party.

17. Jai Hind Academy: The claim in the advertisement (in Hindi), as translated into English, “200 selections pre 2016 in RAS exam,” was not substantiated with authentic evidence and / or validation by an independent third party. Also, the claim is misleading by gross exaggeration.

18. TalentSprint Education Services Private Limited (TalentSprint Bank SSC-CGL coaching): The ad’s claims, “Learn from India’s leading faculty,” “Best Govt. exam training,” “Best Online coaching for Bank & SSC-CGL Exams preparation,” “More candidates succeed at Talentsprint than any other institute,” “India’s Best preparation platform” and “India’s Best faculty,” being absolute claims were not substantiated with comparative data versus other similar institutes. Further, the claims, “Highest Success rates,” “65% success rate” and “Trusted by 700000+ students,” were not substantiated with supporting data. Also, the claims were considered to be misleading.

19. Heritage School: The claim in the ad related to results/percentage of the students was considered to be misleading by omission as the advertiser had stated that the details of the results/percentage of the students are published in the print media after taking the marks of best of four subjects obtained by the student, for which the advertiser did not provide relevant supporting data.

20. Chennai Institute of Management Amirta Hotel: The claim in the advertisement, “having 1000 plus teachers,” was not substantiated with supporting data, and is misleading.

Complaints against advertisements of all educational institutes listed below mostly are upheld because of unsubstantiated claims that they ‘provide 100% placement/and/or they claim to be the No.1 in their respective fields’.

BIMT Gurgaon, Jagran Institute of Management Studies, Hemachandracharya North Gujarat University, Amrita University, Image Infotainment Ltd. (ICAT Design & Media College), MDS Academy, BSC Academy, Det Coaching Centre, GIET Campus (Gandhi Institute of Management Studies), Sky Blue Institute of Design, Career Plus, Socrates Institute, Apparel Training and Design Centre (ATDC), Annai Fathima College, Dashmesh Academy, ICS Coaching Centre, Singhania University, CMS Education Institute and Koneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation (KL University).

E-Commerce

1. ibibo Group Private Limited (Goibibo.com Refer and Earn scheme): The claim offer, “Refer Friends to download app & get free hotel night stay for 1st referral + 1000 goCash,” is misleading by ambiguity and implication as in reality, the advertiser is only giving a Rs 1000 discount for that one night stay.

2. Uber India Systems Private Limited (Uber Moto – flat Rs 10 offer): The claim offer, “Uber Moto – flat rate of Rs 10,” was misleading by omission of the validity period.

3. Naaptol Online Shopping Pvt. Ltd. (Body Massage Cum Fat Burner): The ad’s claim, “local fat and cellulitis loss,” was not substantiated and is misleading by exaggeration.

4. Policy bazaar Insurance Web Aggregator Private Limited (Policybazaar.com – Bike Insurance): The ad shows a situation wherein the two wheeler insurance is expired. The need of having the insurance is indicated in the event a policeman catches a person without insurance. It was concluded that the advertisement is misleading consumers to believe that they need not worry about lapsed policy and is encouraging negligence.

5. Printvenue (Printvenue.com): The ad’s claim, “flat 50% off on your first order valid on all products,” is misleading by ambiguity as though the main claim says that 50% offer is valid on all products, the terms and conditions state that maximum discount of Rs 500 per order is applicable on selected products.

6. One 97 Communications Limited (PayTM): The scene in the ad showing “a motorcyclist using PayTM on his mobile at a petrol pump after fuelling his bike,” shows an unsafe and dangerous practice. Overall impact the advertisement creates would lead consumers to believe that it is safe to use mobile in the premises of a petrol pump. Also, one scene showing distance between the person using the mobile device and petrol pumps is visibly closer than 3 meters, which is violation of Clause C (3) of 4th Schedule of the Petroleum Rules, 2002.

Others

1. Havells India Ltd. (Havells Standard Fans): The ad’s claims, “Best in the Industry Air delivery” and “standard fans build to deliver more air,” were not substantiated. These claims imply better performance versus other products in the market and are misleading as this comparison is not factual as the advertiser has not given any comparative test data against other industry products to prove superiority of their product over others.
There is likelihood of the consumer being misled about the product advertised. It was also disagreed with the advertiser’s contention of the claim being puffery.

2. Kent RO Systems Ltd. (Kent Superb Water Purifiers): In the ad of Kent Superb the claim, “World’s 1st” Smart RO Water Purifier, is false, not substantiated and is grossly misleading.

3. LG Electronics India Ltd. (LG Smart Inverter Refrigerator): The claims in the ad, “New Smart Invertor Compressor,” “Saves up to 48 per cent Energy,” “Dual fridge,” “100 per cent faster conversion from freezer to fridge,” “Auto smart connect” and “Consumes Power less than 2 CFL Bulbs,” were not substantiated with technical data, and are misleading by ambiguity.

4. Renault India Pvt. Ltd. (Renault Lodgy): The ad’s claim, “Renault Lodgy – India’s No.1 MPV,” was not substantiated with market share sales data, and is misleading.

5. Asian Paints Ltd. (Royale Aspira): The contest claim, “SMS ‘Aspira’ to 56161 and win an all-expenses- paid trip to Singapore for two,” is misleading by omission of a disclaimer qualifying the conditions under which this claim offer is tenable.

6. Lenovo India Pvt. Ltd. (Lenovo Vibe P1M): The ad’s claims, “Water-Resistant Build”, “….. protection against sudden drizzle and accidental spills,” were not substantiated adequately and are misleading in absence of a qualifier.

7. HyperCITY Retail (India) Ltd. (Hypercity): The ad’s claims, “Free assured gifts worth up to Rs 100, a gift coupon of Rs 100 and a Free Jute bag” were not substantiated.

8. Amar Ujala Publications Limited (No.1 newspaper of Uttar Pradesh): The claim in the headline, “Uttar Pradesh ka No.1 Akhbaar,” is not substantiated and is misleading by ambiguity and implication.

9. Arvind Lifestyle Brands Limited (Flying Machine): The outdoor ad with headline “What an Ass!” read in conjunction with the visual of a woman presented in a specific posture objectifies women. It is indecent and vulgar in the representation of women and likely to cause grave and widespread offence.

10. Arvind Lifestyle Brands Limited (Flying Machine): The advertisement with the advertisement headline “Kiss my Ass!” read in conjunction with visual of a woman in short jeans, objectifies women and is likely to cause grave and widespread offence.

11. Trycone Power (Trycone Led): The advertisement’s claim, “Trycone LED – Up to 90% Energy Saving,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

12. Clean Car (Clean Car): The claim in the ad, “Clean Car @ Rs 10,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

13. Muliya Properties: The ad’s claim, “916 quality house site at Madikeri,” was not substantiated and is misleading.

14. Supertech Limited: The ad’s claim, “1000 families already moved in,” was not substantiated with supporting evidence and is misleading by exaggeration.

15. Sonal Productions: The claim in the contest (in Marathi) as translated into English, asking readers to identify the correct names from the jumbled words of two dramas, to win two premier show passes, was false and is misleading as the advertiser did not substantiate the details of the contest.

16. Astrologer Suman Rani: The claims in the ad (in Gujarati) related to astrology with guaranteed result, 100% black magic, vashikaran, were false, not substantiated, and are misleading by gross exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits the consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.

17. Devbhumi Broadcast (P) Ltd. (Baba Salim Khan Ji): The claims in the ad (in Hindi) that one can get solution on phone within five hours for all types of problems such as Love marriage main rukawat, santhan prapthi, manchaha pyar mein dokha khaye hue premi premika, vashikarn aur mootkarni specialist, grahapravesh, naukri mein rukawat, desh vedish ki yatra mein rukawat, were false, not substantiated, and are misleading by exaggeration. Also, the advertisement exploits consumers’ lack of knowledge and is likely to lead to grave or widespread disappointment in the minds of consumers.