SpeakUp

June 24,2024 New Delhi, Observing that there was negligence and deficiency in services by the Indian Railway, a consumer commission here has directed its general manager concerned to pay more than ₹1.08 lakh to a passenger whose luggage was stolen during a journey. The District Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission was hearing the complaint which said the passenger’s bag containing valuables worth ₹80,000 was stolen by some unauthorised passengers in January 2016 between Jhansi and Gwalior when he was travelling in a reserved coach of the Malwa Express. “It was the duty of the railways for safe, secure and comfortable journey as well as safety and security of belongings of passengers,” the complaint said. The commission, comprising its president Inder Jeet Singh and member Rashmi Bansal, said it had the territorial jurisdiction to try the case as the complainant boarded the train from New Delhi and there was “a continuity of the journey” till its arrival in Indore. Besides, the office of the opposite party was situated within the commission’s jurisdiction, it said in an order passed on June 3. The commission rejected the argument of the railways that the complainant was negligent about her belongings and that the luggage was not booked. Noting that the complainant was made to “run from pillar to post to register an FIR”, the commission said, “The manner in which the episode has happened and valuables were stolen followed by the efforts of the complainant to get the FIR registered with the authorities for appropriate enquiry or investigation, she suffered all kind of inconvenience and harassment to pursue her legal rights.” It said the complainant had established her case against the Indian Railway for negligence and deficiency in service as her belongings kept in a bag were stolen during her journey against reserved ticket. “Had there been no negligence or deficiency in services on the part of the opposite party or its staff, there would be no such incident. There is no other defence or evidence to deny the value of the articles being carried by the complainant during her journey, therefore, the complainant is held entitled to reimbursement of loss of ₹80,000,” the commission said. It also awarded her ₹20,000 as damages for suffering inconvenience, harassment and mental agony besides ₹8,000 towards litigation cost. Source: Hindustan Times

June 24,2024 An advertisement is considered misleading when it misleads people from reality and influences their behaviour toward purchasing a product or service from the market. Recently, the Supreme Court took a step to stop misleading ads by advertising agencies. As per the Indian Medical Associations & Anr. Vs. Union of India & Ors. 2022, Advertising companies must provide a self-declaratory certificate to the competent authority before any content (Advertisement) is displayed, as per the Supreme Court’s directive. Now, advertising agencies and media have to file a self-advertising form to ensure that the content is not misleading in any way. On June 3, 2024, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, in compliance with a Supreme Court directive, announced new regulations requiring a self-declaration certificate (SDC) to be submitted before the publication or broadcast of any content. This mandate, effective from June 18, 2024, stipulates that all advertising agencies must file their SDCs via the Broadcast Seva Portal managed by the Ministry. Meant for print and digital media, the SDCs are to be give in to through the Press Council of India’s portal. Ads play a pivotal role in establishing a brand in the market. However, they become problematic when they contain false information and manipulate customers’ emotions by providing misleading information about the brand. An evaluation done through the Advertising Standards Council of India in the year 2023-24 on 8,299 advertisements found that around 81% fell into the category of misleading advertisements, with 94% of the infringements identified through proactive monitoring. Online platforms also play a crucial role in spreading misleading advertisements because a large population is connected to social media and consumes content through fake news articles or social media posts. Influencers and celebrities in India also spread misleading advertisements. A survey conducted by the community media social media platform LocalCircles found that during the pandemic, an average of 70% of Indians encountered misleading advertisements through social media or various online sources. After watching these advertisements, they often purchase the products or services of the particular brand being advertised. Patanjali claimed during the COVID-19 pandemic that its medicine “Coronil” was sufficient to cure COVID-19 and was certified and approved by the World Health Organization. However, later the WHO denied this claim and criticized it. Following this, while attacking the medical pharma industry, Patanjali made claims about several diseases, asserting that its medicines were sufficient, well-suited, and could cure them completely. Patanjali’s dispute began in 2022, when the company ran a poster named “Misconceptions Spread by Allopathy: Save Yourself and the Country from Misconceptions Spread through the Pharma and Medical Industry.” In this advertisement, Patanjali claimed that its medicines are scientifically proven to cure various diseases and asserted that allopathic medicine has severe side effects. Following this event, the Indian Medical Association sent a 1000 crore defamation notice under Section 499 of IPC (Indian Penal Code 1860) in the month of May 2022. After this, the Indian Medical Association filed a petition before the Supreme Court about the disparaging advertisement in August 2022. In the first hearing in November 2023, the Supreme Court warned and threatened Patanjali against using terms like “permanent relief” in the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954, to sell its products. Earlier, Patanjali gave assurance that they would not publish such misleading advertisements in the future. This undertaking was recorded by the court in its order. However, the company continues to publish misleading advertisements related to medicinal cures. Upon prima facie observation that Patanjali has infringed on the undertaking, the court issued a contempt of court notice for violation of court order and asked them to file a reply within two weeks. The court also cautioned them against making any statements adverse to any system of medicine in any form. After the company failed to respond to the contempt of court notice, the Supreme Court issued a summons on March 19, requiring Baba Ramdev and Balkrishna to appear personally before the court. On March 21, Balkrishna, the company’s managing director, issued an unequivocal apology. The supreme court warned Baba Ramdev and Balkrishna about disobeying the law and scolded them for their “absolute defiance” in failing to file a suitable affidavit in response to the deceptive ads in a follow-up hearing on April 2. The Supreme Court rejected their apologies and directed them to provide an affidavit within a week. On April 15, the apex court suspended the manufacturing licenses of 14 products of Patanjali Ayurvedic Ltd. and Divya Pharmacy under Rule 159(1) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1954, with immediate effect, and ordered the Uttarakhand State Licensing Authority to file an affidavit by April 29. The apex court judgment on 7 May 2024, in this case is significant since it directed the Centre to notify all advertising companies to give in a self-declaration certificate prior to broadcast any type of advertisement online or in print. Additionally, celebrities and influencers are equally liable for promoting and endorsing misleading advertisements online. This case played a pivotal role in strengthening current regulations and striking against various giant companies that mislead consumers in the name of authenticity. This case opened the door for legislation to frame new rules and guidelines to tackle real-world problems and protect consumers’ rights Source: Livelaw

June 29,2024 Nagaland State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NSCDRC) in collaboration with Nagaland State Bharat Scouts & Guides organised an awareness programme on consumer rights at State Training Centre, Nerhema, Kohima on June 29.  Justice S Hukato Swu President, NSCDRC delivering the introductory speech opined that consumer is not only confined to what we eat but embraces overall problems, be it related to exorbitant prices or to health related issues and concerns every citizen.  Consumer court is placed in each and every district and easily available to help the public, he said and informed that there are no fees levied for commodities below 5 lakh and are edible in nature and one can approach for medical issues and medical negligence.  Swu said that Consumer rights commission in an important part of the state because it concerns every concern citizen who in turn is the consumer. He called the young people to become advocates and spread awareness on this meanwhile added that anyone can write or file a complaint related to consumer issues.  Speaking about present scenario, Swu emphasised on how some business platforms run online operates fraudulently. He further added that the commission is ready to help the public and address such issues. He mentioned the importance of creating more awareness for the public to know their rights and responsibilities as everything is commercialised. Advocate Sunjib Rana speaking on E-Commerce: Liabilities & Mediation highlighted that service at home has become so much convenient but on the other hand it also invites so much of inconvenience and problems because of online scams and frauds.   He called customers to be aware of their rights and what the product is offering. Verbal complaints are just word of much of mouth when we do not have awareness on how to file a complaint, he said.  Rana said a free services provided by the consumer disputes redressal commission are here for the people adding that it is not about the amount of what we buy rather than how well informed we are. Advocate Apila Sangtam providing an overview of the Consumer Act 2019 stated that The consumer protection act 1986 now 2019:107 sections on several provisions provides for better protection of the interest of consumers and for that purpose to make provisions for the establishments of authorities and for the settlement if consumers disputes and the matters connected therewith.  Sangtam highlighted the Rights under the act, 2019 which include Right to safety, Right to be informed, Right to choose, Right to be heard Right to redressed, Right to consumer awareness.  She also highlighted that in some reliefs or remedies includes Removal of defects from the goods, Replacement if goods, Refund of price paid, Compensation of loss or injury suffered, Removal of deficient service and Stopping the sale of hazardous goods. Advocate Sentiyanger Pongen spoke on Medical Negligence pointed out that there are many cases where there are malpractices and wrong medical procedures but many are neglected and these issues needs to be met and compensation and support should be provided. Pongen also highlighted that services from a company or corporation can also be addressed and also cautioned consumer to be careful while using electronic gadgets and be more careful with advertisements. Source: Morungexpress

June 13,2024 The insurance regulatory and development authority of India (IRDAI) has announced several changes in insurance policies, including allowing policyholders to cancel the policy and get a refund for the remaining period and mandatorily asking insurers to provide loans on insurance products. IRDAI also clarified that general insurance companies cannot reject claims for want of documents. Earlier this week, the regulator released a master circular which consolidates all regulations with regards to life insurance policies and repealing 13 circulars related to general insurance.  IRDAI says, “In case the policyholder cancels the policy, she is not required to give reasons for cancellation. The insurer can cancel the policy only on the grounds of established fraud by giving minimum notice of seven days to the retail policyholder.” If the customer cancels the policy, the insurer should refund the proportion premium for the unexpired policy period if the policy term is up to one year and no claim is made during the policy period, the regulator says.    For life insurance policies, the free look period, which provides time to review the policy terms and conditions, has now increased to 30 days instead of 15 days earlier. The facility of a policy loan is now mandatory in all life insurance savings products. IRDAI also clarified that general insurance companies cannot reject claims for want of documents, and they should obtain all necessary documents while underwriting the proposal only. It says, “The policyholder may be asked to submit only those documents that are directly related to the claim settlement such as claim form, driving license, permit, fitness, first information report (FIR), untraced report, fire brigade report, post mortem report, books of accounts, stock register, wage register and repair bills, only in cases where cashless is not available, wherever applicable.” “Under no circumstances can the insurer cancel statutory motor third party liability insurance or any other compulsory insurance mandated by law except in case of double insurance or total loss,” IRDAI says. The insurance regulator also directed insurers to provide a customer information sheet (CIS) that explains in simple words, the basic features of a policy, including the type of insurance, sum assured, benefits, exclusion, if any, free look period, revival of policy, policy loan and any other options.  According to IRDAI, underlying principles of simplification and transparency in insurance enable a prospect or policyholder to make a well-informed decision. “It minimises policyholder grievances and enhances customer satisfaction and confidence. It goes a long way to improve insurance penetration while also providing an inclusive, equitable and diversified insurance for all.” In March this year, IRDAI approved eight principle-based consolidated regulations, including setting up the insurance e-marketplace Bima Sugam for buying, selling and servicing insurance policies and settling claims. Six of these regulations are the outcome of consolidation and streamlining of 34 existing regulations, while two new regulations have been approved—one for the much-awaited Bima Sugam, and the other to cover the corporate governance aspect of insurers. Most importantly, for now, the surrender values for non-linked and linked life insurance products have been left broadly unchanged, thus continuing the progressive hike in surrender values with increasing persistent years of the policy. The IRDAI (Insurance Products) Regulations, 2024, are largely maintaining the status quo regarding the surrender values of non-linked or linked life insurance products and is a big departure from the exposure draft of December 2023. Source: Moneylife

April 28,2024 The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has opened a probe into discovering the actual composition of two Indian spice makers’ blends that allegedly contain high levels of cancer-causing pesticides. Earlier this month, Hong Kong even dropped their sales (and banned) three spice mixes by MDH – Madras Curry Powder, Sambhar Masala Powder and Curry Powder – and an Everest spice blend – Fish Curry Masala, alleging the presence of hazardous amounts of ethylene oxide. Reuters reported the US FDA’s review of the alleged health-threatening contamination. On Friday, a spokesperson added that the FDA was well aware of the reports and “is gathering additional information about the situation.” The media outlet initially reported that while both brands have yet to comment on the issue, Everest eventually asserted on Tuesday that its spices were safe for consumption. The Indian spice giant also formally responded that its products were exported “only after receiving necessary clearances and approval from the laboratories of the Spice Board of India.” On the other hand, MDH disregarded the allegations as “baseless, untrue (with a) lack (of) any substantiating evidence.” MDH’s statement reported by the PTI added, “MDH has not received any communication from regulatory authorities of Singapore and Hong Kong” on Saturday. Furthermore, to reassure customers, the Indian spice brand firmly stated, “We abide by health and safety standards, both domestically and internationally.” The Spices Board of India, the flagship organisation handling worldwide promotions and spice exports, addressed the case, stating that it had requested the data for MDH and Everest’s exports from authorities in Hong Kong and Singapore. The Indian regulator for spice exports also claimed to be working jointly with the companies to narrow down the “root cause” of the alleged quality red flags. Inspection has commenced at the respective plants to “ensure adherence with regulatory standards.” Spices Board also added in a statement: “The Board is in touch with Indian missions in Singapore and Hong Kong to get more information.” The top Indian cooking brand, MDH, was under fire in 2019, too, as some of its batches of sambhar powder were pulled off the shelves for salmonella contamination. FDA’s September 11, 2019, statement read: “House of Spices (India) is recalling different lots of “MDH SAMBAR MASALA”, 3.5oz (100g) UPC code 6291103750327. This product is produced by R-PURE AGRO SPECIALITIES and distributed by HOUSE OF SPICES (INDIA). This product was tested by FDA through a certified laboratory to be positive for Salmonella.” The recalled lot of the MDH sambhar powder was distributed in northern California retail stores. FDA warned against its consumption as Salmonella can cause bacterial foodborne illnesses, including salmonellosis. Its common symptoms entailed “diarrhoea, abdominal cramps, and fever within 12 to 72 hours after eating the contaminated product.” Source: Hindustan Times

June 11,2024 Electricity distribution companies are required to compensate users if it is proven that they intentionally implemented power cuts, resulting in interrupted power supply for customers. Additionally, users are entitled to compensation if an electricity distribution company (DISCOM) fails to provide services such as connection, disconnection, reconnection, shifting, change in consumer category or load, billing services, and addressing voltage and bill-related complaints. The compensation for wilful load shedding if its given then it would come automatically by adjustment of your electricity bill. “Any delay in providing these services (mentioned above) will lead to providing compensation to consumers by the Distribution Company. 24*7 power supply is a right of the consumers and if a Distribution company resorts to wilful load shedding, then consumers have the right to claim compensation from the Distribution Company,” said the Ministry of Power in a recent public notice. As per Electricity (Rights of Consumers) Rules, 2020, notified on December 31, 2020, here are some of the specific criteria where you can claim compensation if the service is not provided and it meets the conditions set by the state electricity commission, which may vary from state to state. “If a DISCOM fails to follow the specified timeline or if the power interruptions exceed the prescribed limits, the regulations mandate compensation for consumers. The compensation is calculated hourly for the duration of interruptions beyond the permissible limits, varying by consumer category,” says Shri Venkatesh, Managing Partner, SKV Law Offices. While the central government notified the Electricity (Rights of Consumers) Rules, 2020, it is up to the State Government to promulgate state specific regulations of the Rule. “SERCs are vested with power to specify the number of interruptions in power supply. As on date, most of SERCs have not promulgated specific regulations post promulgation of the Electricity Rules,” says Tabrez Malawat, Partner, The Guild, a law firm. As per Venkatesh many State Electricity Regulatory Commissions (SERCs) such as those in Delhi, Maharashtra, Rajasthan, Karnataka, Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Chhattisgarh, etc have notified regulations within their Supply Code that specify performance standards. “As per the electricity act, each DISCOM is mandated to maintain grid discipline so as to not overload the system and cause grid collapse which will lead to loss of supply of power. Thus, the Discoms have to provide 24×7 information and data with its respective Load dispatch centres who regulate the electricity to such DISCOM/states,” says Vidhan Vyas, Founder, Vyas Legal. Source: Economic Times

May 14,2024 The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that advocates are not liable for deficiency of services under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and cannot be sued for poor service before consumer courts. A bench of Justices Bela M Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal said the legal profession is sui generis (unique) and the nature of work is specialised and cannot be compared with other professions. “Advocates have to respect client’s autonomy, not entitled to make concessions without express instructions from client and transgress authority. Considerable amount of direct control is with client of advocate. This strengthens our opinion that contract is of personal service and excluded from definition of service under Consumer Protection Act,” the bench said. The judgement came on plea filed by bar bodies, such as Bar Council of India, Delhi High Court Bar Association and Bar of Indian Lawyers, and other individuals challenging a 2007 verdict of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC), which has ruled that advocates and their services come under the purview of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986. Source: Economic Times

June 13,2024 Indians might have to dial up their phone expenses. If a new proposal by telecom regulator Trai (Telecom Regulatory Authority of India) gets the green light, your smartphone and landline numbers will soon come with a price tag. Trai feels that phone number “represents an exceedingly valuable public resource which is not infinite” and charges may be imposed on mobile operators, who may subsequently recover them from users. This move will bring additional trouble for users as Telecom giants Reliance Jio, Bharti Airtel, and Vodafone Idea (Vi) are pushing customers to switch to tier-based postpaid plans. These plans charge more for users with heavier data usage, helping operators increase their average revenue per user (ARPU), according to analysts and industry insiders. Trai said just like Spectrum, ownership of the numbering space resides with government, which only grants mobile operators usage rights over the designated number resource during the tenure of licences. The new Telecom Law, which was passed in December last year, also has an enabling provision to charge for numbers, technically known as ‘telecom identifiers’. Mulling over the possible methods of charging, Trai said the government can look at either imposing a one-time charge per number, or seek an annual recurring charge for each numbering resource allocated to the service provider, or allocate numbering series, with govt conducting centralised auctions for the vanity numbers. It is also considering whether to impose penalties on operators, who are holding on to number resources with low utilisation. For instance, a subscriber might have dual SIMs and not use one for a long period, but the operator avoids cancelling the number to retain its user base. “Simply adhering to strict criteria for assigning numbering resources might not ensure judicious and efficient use of freely allotted numbering resources by service providers. One way of ensuring judicious and efficient use of any finite public resource is by imposing charges, while allocating it. Efficient utilisation can be further ensured by introducing penal provision for those holding numbering resources with low utilisation,” said Trai. Trai, which has to submit recommendations to govt that will also cover the aspect of ever-shrinking numbering resources in the era of 5G, machine-to-machine communications and internet of things, is also taking a leaf out of the several auctions that mobile operators carry out for ‘vanity/fancy/premium numbers’. To make a stronger case for fixing a charge on mobile operators, Trai cited several countries where a fee is levied for telephone numbers, either on the mobile operator or on subscribers. These include countries such as Australia, Singapore, Belgium, Finland, the UK, Lithuania, Greece, Hongkong, Bulgaria, Kuwait, Netherlands, Switzerland, Poland, Nigeria, South Africa, and Denmark. The regulator’s deliberations to charge telecom companies for numbering resources allocated to them will not solve the problem of inefficient use of mobile connections, but will result in the cost being passed on to users, industry executives said. A better solution for the challenges would be for the regulator to define ‘inactive connection’ and a cut-off period within which these numbers should be reallocated, an industry executive said. Source: Economic Times

June 11,2024 After going to the drawing board on several occasions, the Union Law Ministry on Tuesday finalised a document on the national litigation policy which seeks to expedite resolution of pending cases. Soon after assuming charge as the law minister, Arjun Ram Meghwal on Tuesday signed the national litigation policy “document”. The policy document will be placed before the Union Cabinet in the coming days for its approval. The policy is part of the 100-day agenda of the Modi 3.0 government, sources said. Interacting with reporters soon after taking charge, Meghwal said a key priority of the ministry would be faster justice in matters pending in the Supreme Court, high courts, lower courts, tribunals and consumer courts. A senior functionary said the issues flagged by the minister relating to pendency of cases have been conceptualised in the document. “It was the first file he wanted to sign,” the functionary said. The national litigation policy has been drafted and redrafted for several years with successive governments deliberating on its contours. “There is a factor of ease of living in all the stakeholders related to litigation … All stakeholders, including litigants, advocates and others are part of it … the ministry has finalised the policy document,” Meghwal said. In UPA II, then law minister M Veerappa Moily had come out with a national litigation policy, but it never went forward. An official statement issued on June 23, 2010 had said the Centre has formulated a National Litigation Policy to reduce the cases pending in various courts in India under the National Legal Mission to reduce average pendency time from 15 years to 3 years. According to the ‘vision’ of the 2010 policy, it was based on the recognition that the government and its various agencies are the pre-dominant litigants in courts and tribunals in the country. “Its aim is to transform government into an efficient and responsible litigant. This policy is also based on the recognition that it is the responsibility of the government to protect the rights of citizens, to respect fundamental rights and those in charge of the conduct of government litigation should never forget this basic principle,” it had said. Responding to a question of arbitration, Meghwal said the government is working towards making India into an arbitration hub and some laws have been tweaked to enable the plans. “Why can’t the disputes (under arbitration) be settled here. Why should Indians go to Singapore, Dubai or London for arbitration,” he said. Source: Economic Times

May 23,2024 The Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) today published its Annual Complaints Report, which offers a comprehensive analysis of advertisements that were considered objectionable in the fiscal year 2023–24. ASCI examined 10,093 complaints and investigated 8299 advertisements. The majority of violations were on account of misleading claims at 81%, followed by ads that promoted harmful situations or products at 34% (the same ad can be processed for multiple objections). Digital ads accounted for 85% of ads processed, and had a lower compliance rate of 75%, compared to 97% for print and TV. This raises serious questions about the online safety of consumers, as was highlighted last year as well. 94% of the ads that were processed were picked up suo moto by ASCI. 49% of the advertisements picked up by ASCI were not contested by the advertisers. A total of 98% of cases eventually required modification as they violated the ASCI Code. Healthcare emerged as the most violative sector, contributing to 19% of cases, followed by illegal offshore betting (17%), personal care (13%), conventional education (12%), food and beverage (10%), and realty (7%). Baby care emerged as a new contender in the top violators category, with influencer promotions contributing to 81% of babycare cases. Out of the 1575 advertisements processed in the healthcare sector, 1249 violated the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954, and were reported to the sector regulator. 86% of the healthcare ads appeared on digital platforms. 1311 advertisements for illegal betting were sent to the appropriate authorities for further action. Of the 1064 ads that ASCI examined in personal care, 95% of them appeared online, with more than half (55%) being influencer non-disclosure cases. Celebrities continued to appear in ads that were in violation of the ASCI code. ASCI processed complaints against 101 ads featuring celebrities, 91% of which required modification. 104 celebrities appearing in these 101 ads were found to be in violation of the celebrity guidelines as they could not provide any evidence of due diligence. It may be noted that due diligence is also a requirement under the Consumer Protection Act, 2019. The top five violative categories for celebrity violations were personal care (22%), food and beverages (21%), illegal/betting (20%), healthcare (9%), and durables (6%). In addition to processing objectionable ads through its own processes, mp. Besides the 1311 offshore illegal/betting ads escalated to the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting and the 1249 healthcare ads reported to the Ministry of AYUSH for potential violations of the Drugs and Magic Remedies Act, 1954, others included realty (493 ads), alcohol beverages (82 ads), and tobacco and tobacco based products (65 ads). To combat these trends, ASCI, under the aegis of the ASCI Academy has introduced a certification course called “The ‘ASCI Guide to Responsible Advertising”. The course, designed for students and professionals, aims to support the advertising ecosystem, achieve ethical advertising standards and compliance with the ASCI Code and various regulations, and reduce the incidence of objectionable advertising. Saugata Gupta, Chairman of ASCI, said, “As digital emerges as a dominant media in which advertisements thrive, ASCI has geared up to the challenges through constant investment in technology. We will continue to improve our processes and expertise to ensure nimble and transparent resolution of objectionable ads. At this critical juncture, we look forward to collaborating with all stakeholders to promote ethical advertising and calling out advertisements that eventually erode trust in advertising.” Manisha Kapoor, CEO & Secretary General of ASCI, said, “2023-24 has been a truly challenging year, and ASCI stepped up to this by focusing our efforts on digital. 3200 advertisements were shared with various regulators, such as MIB, Ayush, and MahaRera, for direct violations of the law. We see this as a continuing area of focus. Sectors like healthcare emerging at the top are a significant concern for all citizens. With the highest number of violative ads seen online, advertisers and platforms must work more closely with regulators and self-regulators to keep consumers protected. ASCI Academy’s recently launched e-learning courses on Responsible Advertising and Responsible Influencing is a significant step to increase the industry’s capacity to create ads with greater understanding of regulatory standards and ensure that consumers are not exposed to objectionable advertising in the first place.” Source: Economic Times