Daijiworld Media Network - New Delhi
New Delhi, Sep 14: The Delhi High Court on Monday dismissed a plea filed by PB Agro LLP, the maker of Vimal Elaichi, challenging show-cause notices issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to brand ambassadors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff over alleged surrogate advertising of Vimal Pan Masala.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma dismissed the petition on the ground that the Delhi High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction to hear the matter. The court held that courts in Maharashtra would be the more appropriate and convenient forum for PB Agro LLP to challenge the notices, applying the doctrine of forum conveniens.
The court made it clear that it was not examining the merits of the company's challenge. "The petition is therefore dismissed on this ground, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the petitioner's challenge," the order said.
PB Agro LLP had approached the court claiming that it had engaged reputed actors to promote its cardamom product, Vimal Elaichi, and that the endorsement agreements and advertising campaign complied with applicable laws.
According to the petition, the Maharashtra FDA had issued notices alleging that advertisements for Vimal Elaichi amounted to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, a chewable product banned in Maharashtra. The regulator directed the actors featured in the advertisements to submit documents establishing that Vimal Elaichi was a distinct product from the banned pan masala products. It also sought stoppage of the promotional campaign and removal of related material from digital platforms.
The company argued that an August 11 notice had been issued only to the actors and not to PB Agro LLP, despite the company claiming that it would suffer irreparable loss from any regulatory action. It further contended that it had not been given an opportunity to be heard and that the Maharashtra FDA lacked jurisdiction to direct the advertisements to be stopped.
PB Agro LLP also argued that the allegation of surrogate advertising was baseless, claiming that Vimal Pan Masala had neither been manufactured nor sold in Maharashtra since 2001. The company further referred to the nationwide ban on pan masala containing tobacco imposed by the Supreme Court in 2013.
The Delhi High Court, however, held that the company had failed to establish that any substantial or material part of the cause of action had arisen within Delhi.
The court noted that the disputed show-cause notice was issued by the FDA in Mumbai to the brand ambassadors, who are residents of Mumbai, in connection with alleged activities and statutory violations in Maharashtra.
The court also rejected the argument that the presence of the Union Health Ministry and the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), both based in Delhi, was sufficient to confer jurisdiction on the Delhi High Court. It pointed out that no specific relief had been sought against either authority and that no order passed by them had been challenged or even placed on record.
Justice Sharma said the fact that PB Agro LLP operated from Delhi or had engaged brand ambassadors from Delhi could not, by itself, establish territorial jurisdiction, particularly when the impugned notice had not been issued to the company.
The court observed that jurisdiction could not be created by selectively relying on incidental facts such as the company's registered office, the place from which payments were made or where an advertising campaign was conceived or managed when such facts had no direct bearing on the validity of the impugned notice.
It further cautioned against shaping pleadings in a manner that presents incidental background facts as the cause of action when the material events underlying the dispute had occurred elsewhere.
Counsel appearing for the Centre and the Central Consumer Protection Authority had also argued that the petition should have been filed before the Bombay High Court since the show-cause notice had been issued by the Maharashtra government authorities.
With the dismissal, PB Agro LLP remains free to pursue its challenge before the appropriate court in Maharashtra. The Delhi High Court has not expressed any opinion on whether the Vimal Elaichi advertisements amounted to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala.