Patanjali Ayurved has taken its legal battle to the Delhi High Court, challenging an earlier order that bars the company from broadcasting advertisements deemed disparaging against its competitor, Dabur Chyawanprash.
During the initial proceedings, a bench comprising Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla highlighted that Patanjali’s advertisements appeared to engage in “generic disparagement,” making clear references to Dabur. The court sternly cautioned Patanjali, stating that if the appeal is perceived as unnecessary or a “luxury litigation,” substantial costs would be imposed.
The bench specifically pointed to Patanjali’s tagline: “You have said: ‘Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?’ So, when you have used the word 40 herbs, it is an obvious reference to the respondent (Dabur). The moment you imply that other chyawanprash is ‘ordinary’ while yours is ‘excellent,’ you are making a direct representation to the public against Dabur’s product,” the bench told Patanjali’s counsel.
The court further noted that the initial interim order against Patanjali was a discretionary decision by a single judge, questioning why a division bench should intervene. “You have painted in black everyone else who is making chyawanprash, that they don’t know what chyawanprash is and how it is made, so how will they make chyawanprash. This is a generic disparagement case. The interim order is purely discretionary. Why should we interfere with this interim order? Tell us. If we find now that it is a useless appeal, we will impose costs. If we find it is a luxury litigation, we will impose a cost. We have made our minds clear to you. Where is your irreparable loss? We are not going to allow ‘aaltu faaltu’ appeals for everything. It is not that this order is going to hurt you. You have lots of money, so you can file an appeal in every case.”
Upcoming Hearing
Following the court’s remarks, Patanjali’s counsel requested additional time to consult with their clients regarding the matter. The appeal has been adjourned, with the next hearing set for September 23.
The original injunction, issued on July 3, specifically prohibited Patanjali from running these disparaging advertisements. The single judge had found a strong prima facie case of disparagement in both Patanjali’s television and print campaigns.
As part of the interim injunction, Patanjali was directed to remove the phrase ‘Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?’ from its print ads and to modify its Hindi counterparts accordingly.
The judge also emphasized the impact of the TV commercial, which featured Baba Ramdev, a well-known yoga and Vedic expert, personally narrating the advertisement. This presence, the judge noted, lent significant weight to the commercial’s claims.
Dabur’s petition had contended that “Patanjali Special Chyawanprash” not only disparaged Dabur Chyawanprash specifically but also chyawanprash products in general. It argued that Patanjali falsely claimed “no other manufacturer knows to prepare chyawanprash,” constituting a broad generic disparagement.
Furthermore, Dabur alleged that Patanjali’s advertisements contained “false and misleading statements” concerning an Ayurvedic drug/medicine, using disparaging comparisons with Dabur Chyawanprash. The petition concluded that the use of the prefix “ordinary” for all other chyawanprash products explicitly suggested their inferiority, while also making “untrue” claims that other manufacturers lacked knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and traditional formulae.