Archive · 15 Sep 2026
Delhi High Court Rejects Vimal Elaichi Plea Over FDA Notices
PB Agro makes a cardamom product called Vimal Elaichi.
Three actors—Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff—appeared in advertisements for it.
Maharashtra’s food regulator sent the actors notices about the advertisements.
The regulator said the ads might really be promoting Vimal Pan Masala, a product prohibited in Maharashtra.
PB Agro asked a Delhi court to cancel the notices.
The company said its Delhi operations and advertising work gave the Delhi court a reason to hear the case.
The court disagreed because the notices came from Maharashtra and were about alleged actions there.
The court did not decide whether the advertisements actually broke the law.
The Delhi High Court dismissed PB Agro LLP’s petition challenging Maharashtra FDA notices issued to Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff.
The Maharashtra FDA alleged that Vimal Elaichi advertisements amounted to surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala, which is prohibited in Maharashtra.
Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma ruled that the Delhi High Court lacked territorial jurisdiction because the notices originated from Maharashtra and concerned alleged violations there.
The court said PB Agro’s Delhi office, advertising operations, payments and business connections could not by themselves establish jurisdiction, especially since the notices were not issued to the company.
The court did not decide the merits of the surrogate-advertising dispute, leaving PB Agro to pursue its grievances in the appropriate Maharashtra forum.
- Who
- PB Agro LLP, Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn, Tiger Shroff, the Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration, the Delhi High Court, the Centre and the Central Consumer Protection Authority.
- What
- The Delhi High Court dismissed PB Agro’s petition challenging show-cause notices issued to three actors over Vimal Elaichi advertisements.
- When
- The notices were issued on August 11, and the Delhi High Court dismissed the petition on Monday after hearing the jurisdiction issue.
- Where
- The petition was heard in Delhi; the notices were issued by the Maharashtra FDA in Mumbai and concerned alleged violations in Maharashtra.
- Why
- The court held that PB Agro had not shown that a substantial or material part of the cause of action arose in Delhi, making Maharashtra the appropriate forum.
PB Agro LLP’s Position
Court and Authorities’ Position
Delhi jurisdiction
PB Agro LLP’s Position
PB Agro argued that the Delhi High Court could hear the case because the company operated from Delhi, its advertising campaign was conceptualised and managed there, payments to ambassadors were made there, and the alleged harm was suffered there.
Court and Authorities’ Position
The court said these connections could not by themselves confer territorial jurisdiction because the notices originated with the Maharashtra FDA and concerned alleged activities and violations in Maharashtra.
Who would suffer harm
PB Agro LLP’s Position
PB Agro said the notices were sent only to the actors, even though the company—not the actors alone—would suffer irreparable harm if action were taken against the campaign.
Court and Authorities’ Position
The court noted that PB Agro had not itself received the notices and had not been asked to respond, remove advertisements, produce documents or appear before the Maharashtra FDA.
Nature of the advertisements
PB Agro LLP’s Position
PB Agro maintained that Vimal Elaichi was a distinct cardamom product and said the allegation that its advertisements promoted Vimal Pan Masala was baseless.
Court and Authorities’ Position
The Maharashtra FDA alleged surrogate promotion of Vimal Pan Masala and asked the actors to demonstrate that Vimal Elaichi was an independent product; the Delhi High Court did not decide which position was correct.
Appropriate forum
PB Agro LLP’s Position
PB Agro sought to have the notices quashed through the Delhi High Court and argued that the Maharashtra FDA lacked authority to direct that the advertisement be halted.
Court and Authorities’ Position
The court, supported by objections from the Centre and the Central Consumer Protection Authority, held that Maharashtra was the appropriate forum for grievances arising from the notices.
- Petitioner
- PB Agro LLP, associated with the Vimal Elaichi brand.
- Actors named in notices
- Shah Rukh Khan, Ajay Devgn and Tiger Shroff.
- Issuing authority
- The Maharashtra Food and Drug Administration, based in Mumbai for the challenged action.
- FDA allegation
- The Vimal Elaichi advertisements were surrogate promotions for Vimal Pan Masala.
- Notice requirements
- The actors were asked to provide documents showing that Vimal Elaichi was an independent product and to stop endorsing the advertisements.
- Digital-content directions
- The notices sought removal of related promotional material from social media, websites and other digital platforms.
- Court’s decision
- The petition was dismissed for lack of territorial jurisdiction, without ruling on the merits.
- Company’s position
- PB Agro argued that Vimal Pan Masala had not been manufactured or sold in Maharashtra since 2001 and that the surrogate-advertising allegation was baseless.
