Delhi High Court Restrains Patanjali From Publishing Ads Against Dabur
The Delhi Excessive Court docket has restrained Patanjali Ayurved Restricted from publishing ads in opposition to Chyawanprash of Dabur India Restricted.
A Go well with was filed by Dabur searching for a Decree of everlasting and necessary injunction in opposition to the ads of Yoga guru Baba Ramdev’s Patanjali for his or her product, particularly, “Patanjali Particular Chyawanprash”, alleging disparagement and denigration of Plaintiff’s product, particularly, ‘Dabur Chyawanprash’, and your entire class of Chyawanprash basically.
A Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna noticed, “… the impugned ads, which give the general message that opponents wouldn’t have the know-how to fabricate Chyawanprash in accordance with the traditions and ayurvedic texts, and are strange, and shoppers ought to not accept strange merchandise, which aren’t ayurvedic medicines, as they don’t seem to be manufactured as per historic ayurvedic texts, are clearly disparaging in nature. Within the current case, context of the utilization of the phrase ‘strange Chyawanprash’ is clearly destructive. Chyawanprash, which is ready strictly in accordance with the elements and formulations listed in any of the traditional ayurvedic texts, as per First Schedule of the Medication and Cosmetics Act, can be at par and can’t be denigrated as ‘strange’.”
The Bench mentioned that the usage of the phrase ‘strange’ within the current context would lead a mean shopper to deduce that the opposite Chyawanprash are both pretend, inferior, or spurious, as in comparison with the Chyawanprash of the Defendants, which has been ready by really following the ayurvedic traditions.
“That is undoubtedly a false assertion, when Chyawanprash made by the plaintiff and different producers can also be in accordance with the textbooks enlisted as per the Medication and Cosmetics Act”, it added.
Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi represented the Plaintiff whereas Senior Advocates Rajiv Nayar and Jayant Mehta represented the Defendants.
Case Background
An Utility was filed searching for interim reduction qua the impugned Hindi tv industrial (TVC) and impugned Hindi print commercial issued by the Defendants (Patanjali). One other Utility sought interim reduction qua impugned English print commercial issued by the Defendants, in relation to their product. As per the Plaintiff (Dabur), by the use of impugned TVC and Print Advertisements, the Defendants disparaged ‘Dabur Chyawanprash’ particularly, and Chyawanprash basically, and the identical constitutes particular in addition to generic disparagement.
Dabur additional pleaded that false and deceptive statements have been made within the impugned TVC and Print Advertisements in disparaging comparability with ‘Dabur Chyawanprash’ and different present Chyawanprash out there. It was the case of the Plaintiff that within the impugned TVC and Print Advertisements, the Defendants have clearly and undisputedly recognized, denigrated, and disparaged its ‘Dabur Chyawanprash’ and disparaged all Chyawanprash out there. Therefore, the Go well with was filed searching for everlasting and necessary injunction, and damages for alleged denigration and disparagement. The Purposes had been filed earlier than the Excessive Court docket, searching for interim reduction to remain on the TVC and Print Advertisements.
Court docket’s Observations
The Excessive Court docket after listening to the arguments from each side, remarked, “The truth that the plaintiff advertises its merchandise as having 40+ ayurvedic herbs, and the impugned Print Ads clearly warning shoppers to not accept Chyawanprash which has 40 ayurvedic herbs, is aimed toward figuring out the plaintiff’s product. Therefore, there’s a optimistic and unmistakable identification of the plaintiff’s product within the impugned Print Ads.”
The Court docket famous that any ayurvedic drugs, together with Chyawanprash, which is manufactured as per the elements and formulae set out within the authoritative books listed within the First Schedule of the Medication and Cosmetics Act, can’t be said to be inferior or strange compared to one other ayurvedic drugs, by adopting the elements and formulae listed in one other authoritative Ayurveda ebook, listed within the First Schedule.
“The intent and total impact of the impugned ads are to negatively painting different Chyawanprash out there, together with, plaintiff’s ‘Dabur Chyawanprash’ and to denigrate your entire class as strange, by conveying the message that they don’t seem to be ready as per right ayurvedic texts, and are subsequently, inferior or sub-standard”, it added.
Moreover, the Court docket mentioned that to convey a message by the impugned ads, that solely Patanjali follows the custom established by nice sages, is wrong and disparages your entire class of Chyawanprash basically.
“… the plaintiff and different producers of Chyawanprash, who manufacture the identical in accordance with the elements and formulae prescribed within the authoritative books of ayurvedic techniques and medicines, comply with the ayurvedic traditions. Simply because the plaintiff follows a special ayurvedic textual content ebook from the one adopted by the defendants doesn’t make the product of the plaintiff or different producers of Chyawanprash following different Ayurveda textual content books as enlisted, as strange and never as per the ayurvedic traditions/scriptures”, it noticed.
The Court docket was of the opinion that anyone who manufactures an ayurvedic drug by following the statute and the scriptures as enlisted within the statute, can’t be denigrated as strange, when the statute considers it to be nearly as good and permissible ayurvedic drug, i.e., Chyawanprash on this case.
“Subsequently, the defendants can’t garbage the plaintiff or different producers, who manufacture Chyawanprash strictly as per the enlisted ayurvedic scriptures, as strange. … Acclamation of 1’s merchandise and even stating that they’re higher than these of the rival shouldn’t be actionable. Nevertheless, false illustration as to the standard or character of the competitor’s merchandise would fall within the class of disparagement”, it additional emphasised.
The Court docket additionally emphasised that whereas coping with circumstances of digital ads, Courts must be aware of the general message which an commercial seeks to speak.
“It’s to be famous that the ads in query pertain to an ayurvedic drug, i.e., Chyawanprash. Therefore, to a mean one who watches the impugned TVC, the place Mr. Ramdev, an acknowledged yoga and vedic skilled, declares that solely the defendants possess the information of ayurvedic texts to arrange unique Chyawanprash, they’d clearly be influenced by such statements and consider them to be true, and discard different Chyawanprash”, it mentioned.
The Court docket, subsequently, held that this case is clearly that of disparagement. Furthermore, it took be aware of the next two ideas –
I. For an motion of malicious falsehood, the Plaintiff should show that the impugned assertion/illustration is unfaithful, and that the identical is made maliciously, with out simply trigger or excuse.
II. An entity can’t bask in industrial free speech which tends to maliciously injure a rival/competitor.
Conclusion and Instructions
The Court docket additional noticed, “… a powerful prima facie case of disparagement is clear in each types of ads, i.e., TVC and Print. … Contemplating the aforesaid detailed dialogue, the plaintiff has established a powerful prima facie case in its favour. Steadiness of comfort additionally lies in favour of the plaintiff and in opposition to the defendants. Additional, the plaintiff shall undergo irreparable loss, together with lack of popularity, if interim reduction, as prayed within the current functions, shouldn’t be granted.”
Therefore, the Court docket directed that from the Print Ads, the Defendants shall delete the primary two strains, i.e., “Why accept strange Chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?”.
“The defendants can accordingly modify the impugned Print Ads in each Hindi and English languages. … Equally, as regards the impugned TVC, the defendants are directed to delete the strains as given within the first three columns of the desk displaying the story board of the impugned TVC, i.e., ‘Jinko Ayurved or Vedon ka gyaan nahi Charak, Sushrut, Dhanvantri aur Chyawanrishi Ki Parampara ke Anuroop, unique Chyawanprash kaise bana payenge’. Equally, the defendants are directed to delete the strains as given within the final column of the desk displaying the story board of the impugned TVC, ‘Toh strange Chyawanprash kyu’, from their TVC”, it additionally directed.
The Court docket clarified that the Defendants shall be allowed to run the impugned Print Advertisements and TVC after the aforesaid modifications. It concluded that the opposite points and claims made by the Defendants are subject material of trial within the Go well with.
Accordingly, the Excessive Court docket disposed of the Purposes and restrained Patanjali from publishing impugned Print Advertisements and airing TVC.
Trigger Title- Dabur India Restricted v. Patanjali Ayurved Restricted and Anr. (Impartial Quotation: 2025:DHC:5232)
Look:
Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi, Advocates R. Jawahar Lal, Anirudh Bakhru, and Meghna Kumar.
Defendants: Senior Advocates Rajiv Nayar, Jayant Mehta, Advocates Rohit Gandhi, Simranjeet Singh, Saurabh Seth, Neha Gupta, Rishabh Pant, Yajat Gulia, and Tina Aneja.
