The legal battle surrounding high-profile product endorsements has hit a major procedural roadblock. The Delhi High Court has officially dismissed a petition filed by PB Agro LLP, the manufacturer of Vimal Elaichi, which challenged the show-cause notices issued by the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to top Bollywood brand ambassadors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, and Tiger Shroff.
Delivering the verdict, a single-judge bench led by Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ruled that the petition was fundamentally non-maintainable before the Delhi High Court due to a lack of territorial jurisdiction. Citing the doctrine of forum conveniens, the court emphasized that courts in Maharashtra represent the natural, most appropriate, and convenient forum to address grievances regarding the regulatory notices.
Understanding the Vimal Elaichi Controversy
The legal row traces back to regulatory actions initiated by state authorities targeting prominent promotional campaigns:
- The Regulatory Notice: On August 11, the Maharashtra FDA issued show-cause notices to actors Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, and Tiger Shroff over their active participation in advertisements promoting Vimal Elaichi.
- The Surrogate Advertising Allegation: The state regulator contended that the Vimal Elaichi commercials constituted a deliberate surrogate promotion for Vimal Pan Masala—a chewable product that remains legally prohibited across Maharashtra.
- Directives Issued: The FDA directed the actors to submit due diligence records, endorsement contracts, and proof establishing that Vimal Elaichi operates as an independent, distinct commodity from the banned pan masala line. Furthermore, the notice demanded an immediate halt to the promotional campaign and the removal of related digital assets from public platforms.
Arguments From PB Agro LLP and the Defence
PB Agro LLP approached the Delhi High Court seeking to quash the regulatory actions, raising several key contentions through its legal team:
- Impact Without Direct Notice: The company argued that although the August 11 show-cause notice was formally addressed solely to the actors rather than PB Agro directly, any adverse regulatory action would directly inflict severe and irreparable commercial harm on the company without providing them a prior hearing.
- Compliance and Distinction: The manufacturer maintained that its endorsement agreements strictly mandate compliance with applicable laws, asserting that Vimal Elaichi is a genuine cardamom-based product. They further argued that allegations of surrogate advertising lacked substance because non-tobacco pan masala under the brand had not been actively marketed or sold in Maharashtra in decades, while tobacco-infused variants have faced a pan-India Supreme Court bar since 2013.
- Jurisdictional Logic Attempted: To anchor the case in the capital, the company pointed out that its registered operations are based in Delhi, campaign management and payments originate from there, and central bodies like the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI) and the Union Health Ministry are headquartered in New Delhi.
Why the Delhi High Court Rejected the Plea
The court firmly dismantled the petitioner’s grounds for establishing local jurisdiction in Delhi:
- Origin of Action: Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma noted that the impugned show-cause notice originated from the FDA office in Mumbai, targeted brand ambassadors residing in Mumbai, and dealt with alleged statutory violations occurring exclusively within Maharashtra.
- Immaterial Background Facts: The bench ruled that a company carrying out business or maintaining an office in Delhi—or the mere presence of the FSSAI headquarters in the capital—cannot artificially confer territorial jurisdiction over a localized regulatory measure initiated by another state’s administration. The court cautioned against shaping pleadings to present incidental background facts as the core cause of action.
With the petition dismissed solely on jurisdictional grounds, the merits of whether the Vimal Elaichi campaign constitutes surrogate advertising remain open, leaving PB Agro free to pursue appropriate legal remedies before the courts in Maharashtra.
By: Bollyo
