Calcutta High Court Clears Dabur’s Ranbir Kapoor Ad, Rejects Emami’s Disparagement Claim
Thanks for studying this submit, do not forget to subscribe!
Calcutta Excessive Court docket dominated Dabur’s ‘Cool King’ advert with Ranbir Kapoor doesn’t insult Emami’s merchandise. The Court docket stated calling a rival “Sadharan” isn’t disparagement.
Kolkata: At present, on July 2, a Division Bench of the Calcutta Excessive Court docket dismissed an attraction filed by Emami Restricted. The corporate had claimed that Dabur India’s commercial for its talcum powder model Cool King, that includes Bollywood actor Ranbir Kapoor, insulted or “disparaged” its personal talcum powder merchandise – Dermi Cool and Navratna.
The Bench of Justices Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Uday Kumar upheld an earlier modified order by a single choose.
ALSO READ: Delhi HC Bounces RCB’s Plea: Uber’s ‘Hyderabaddie’ Ad with Travis Head Stays On-Air
The judges held that the advert, the place Ranbir Kapoor calls a rival product “Sadharan” (that means “peculiar”), doesn’t insult or mislead shoppers about Emami’s merchandise.
The Court docket noticed:
“The liberty of economic speech of the respondent and its basic proper to do enterprise can’t be throttled on a imprecise notion of disparagement.”
Which means that Dabur’s proper to promote and do enterprise freely can’t be blocked simply because Emami felt that the advert was offensive, with out robust proof.
The dispute started when Dabur aired a tv advert the place a personality rejects a talcum powder bottle marked as “Sadharan” and as an alternative picks Dabur’s Cool King.
Emami claimed that the bottle used within the unique model of the advert – a white bottle with a inexperienced cap – regarded like their very own Dermi Cool design, and the usage of the phrase “peculiar” insulted their product.
In July 2024, Emami filed a case in courtroom and received an ad-interim injunction (a brief cease order) on July 11, 2024. This stopped Dabur from exhibiting the advert that used a bottle much like Emami’s product.
Later, Dabur modified the commercial. Within the new model, the green-capped bottle was changed with a easy white cylindrical bottle with a black cap.
The advert not had any bottle that regarded like Emami’s merchandise. Due to this, the one choose modified the sooner injunction in January 2025 and allowed Dabur to air the revised advert.
Nonetheless sad, Emami filed an attraction. Their lawyer, Senior Advocate Debnath Ghosh, argued that even within the new advert, the phrase “Sadharan” (peculiar) made folks assume badly about their talcum powders, particularly Dermi Cool.
He stated the black-capped bottle nonetheless reminded folks of their merchandise, and that the general public would hyperlink the phrase “peculiar” with Dermi Cool.
Alternatively, Dabur’s lawyer, Senior Advocate Sudipto Sarkar, strongly defended the advert.
He stated that Emami didn’t have design safety for all the Dermi Cool bottle, just for the cap of 1 kind. So they’d no proper to complain about the entire bottle being copied.
He additionally stated that the brand new advert used a computer-generated, plain white bottle with a black cap, which regarded nothing like all Emami product. It didn’t carry a label, didn’t use Emami’s product names, and didn’t present something deceptive.
Dabur additionally identified one thing attention-grabbing – Emami’s personal advertisements prior to now had in contrast its Navratna Maxx Cool Talc to “peculiar” powders.
Their campaigns used phrases like “regular talc” and “khushboo wale powder” (that means aromatic powders) to focus on how their product was higher.
So, Dabur stated it was unfair for Emami to object when Dabur was doing the identical factor – making a basic comparability.
After listening to either side, the Division Bench stated that Emami was overreacting and that their claims had no stable proof. The Court docket discovered that:
- The brand new bottle in Dabur’s advert was “solely completely different” from Emami’s Dermi Cool design;
- The phrase “Sadharan” was utilized in a basic method and did not insult or degrade Emami’s merchandise;
- There was no reminiscence or “double recall” amongst common shoppers linking the sooner model of
the advert with the present one.
The Court docket additional commented:
“Except one is an avid follower of commercials, having nothing higher to do, it’s unbelievable {that a} widespread goal client of regular prudence would have such double recall.”
This meant that solely somebody watching advertisements all day may bear in mind each variations and join them. A daily client wouldn’t discover or care that a lot.
One other level raised was whether or not courts are allowed to “pre-approve” commercials or not.
The Bench clarified that when an organization modifications an advert due to a courtroom order, the courtroom can have a look at the brand new model to determine whether or not it breaks any guidelines.
The case shouldn’t be the primary time Dabur and Emami have fought in courtroom. In 2023, Emami had additionally taken Dabur to courtroom over the packaging of Cool King Thanda Tel (hair oil), saying it regarded too much like Navratna hair oil.
Within the current matter, Emami was represented by Senior Advocate Debnath Ghosh, together with advocates Shuvasish Sengupta, Biswaroop Mukherjee, Mini Agarwal, and Ratnadipa Sarkar.
Dabur was represented by Senior Advocate Sudipto Sarkar, briefed by advocates Sourajit Dasgupta, R. Jawaharlal, Meghna Kumar, and Sudhakar Prasad.
Case Title:
Emami Restricted vs Dabur India Restricted
Learn Order:
Click Here to Read Our Reports on Disparagement
