Guest Column: TRAI’s ALTD reccos a turning point for b’cast sector 
Indian publishers, including those owned by Ambani & Adani, challenge privacy laws 
Netflix’s marks Korean decade as K-content rules non-English viewing 
GTPL Hathway now tracking TV viewership via RPD, targets 50k homes 
Netflix, hoichoi in pact to take Bengali stories to wider audiences 
Google unveils Gemini 4 Carbon AI model 
Christopher Chung joins Apple TV’s ‘Ascension’ 
TRAI internet TV proposal raises OTT regulation concerns: ET report 
Rohit calls Rajpal Yadav, Kiku’s episode best on ‘Family Full House’ 
Ranbir Kapoor recalls Alia Bhatt proposal story on ‘Kaun Banega Crorepati’ 
The Delhi High Court will pass on Monday (Sept. 14) its order on the point of jurisdiction to entertain a plea by makers of Vimal Elaichi seeking to quash show-cause notices issued to their brand ambassadors, Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff, by the Maharashtra FDA for alleged misrepresentation of the product in their advertisement.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma, who has reserved the order on the issue whether the Delhi High Court has territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter, is scheduled to deliver the order on September 14, a PTI report from new Delhi stated yesterday.
In its petition, PB Agro LLP said it engages services of reputed actors for promotion of the cardamom product under the brand Vimal and its endorsement agreements with them, and the company assures that the advertisement campaign is in full compliance of the applicable laws.
It said regulatory notices were issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) alleging that advertisements for Vimal Elaichi amount to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a chewable product banned within Maharashtra.
The plea said the Maharashtra FDA had directed the actors featured in Vimal Elaichi advertisements to provide documentation demonstrating that Vimal Elaichi is a product different from banned pan masala products.
It also called for a halt on the promotional campaign and for the withdrawal of related materials from digital platforms.
The counsel representing the petitioner had argued that the August 11, 2026 FDA notice was sent only to the actors and not to the company itself despite the fact that the company alone is going to suffer irreparably due to any action taken by the state regulator.
The counsel had said the petitioner was not even provided with an opportunity to be heard.
The company had claimed that the Maharashtra FDA lacked jurisdiction to issue directions to halt the advertisement.
In its petition, the company also stated that surrogate advertisement allegations were baseless since Vimal pan masala has not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001, and pan masala containing tobacco has been barred by the Supreme Court nationwide since 2013.
