Patanjali Ayurved has appealed to the Delhi High Court, contesting a prior ruling that barred the company from airing advertisements considered critical of Dabur Chyawanprash.
During initial proceedings, Justices C. Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla verbally noted that Patanjali’s ads seemed to broadly discredit Dabur, making clear references to their rival product.
The court issued a stern warning, stating that if the appeal proved to be ‘luxury litigation’ or ‘useless,’ Patanjali would face significant financial penalties.
The judges highlighted Patanjali’s slogan, ‘Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?’, interpreting the ’40 herbs’ reference as a direct dig at Dabur.
The bench explained to Patanjali’s legal team that by implying other chyawanprash brands with ’40 herbs’ are ‘ordinary,’ they were effectively promoting their own product as superior and discouraging consumers from choosing Dabur.
The court reiterated that the original single-judge order, classifying the advertisement as disparaging, was an interim measure and saw no compelling reason for the division bench to overturn this discretionary decision.
The judges asserted that Patanjali had broadly disparaged all other chyawanprash manufacturers, implying a lack of knowledge in preparation. They characterized it as a ‘generic disparagement’ case and questioned why they should intervene in a discretionary interim order.
Furthermore, the bench warned of imposing costs if the appeal was found to be ‘useless’ or ‘luxury litigation,’ emphasizing that Patanjali, with its resources, should not pursue frivolous appeals without demonstrating ‘irreparable loss.’
Next Hearing Scheduled
Following a request from Patanjali’s lawyer for time to consult with clients, the court postponed the appeal hearing to September 23.
The single judge’s original injunction, issued on July 3, prohibited Patanjali from airing disparaging ads against Dabur Chyawanprash, citing clear evidence of disparagement in both television and print media.
This interim injunction, granted in response to Dabur’s petition, specifically ordered Patanjali to remove the phrase ‘Why settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?’ from its print ads and to modify Hindi versions accordingly.
The judge also highlighted that the TV commercial featured Baba Ramdev, a well-known yoga and Vedic expert, whose presence and narration lent significant weight to the advertisement’s claims.
Dabur’s petition asserted that ‘Patanjali Special Chyawanprash’ ads specifically disparaged Dabur and chyawanprash products generally, by suggesting that ‘no other manufacturer knows how to prepare chyawanprash,’ thus constituting generic disparagement.
The petition further claimed that Patanjali’s advertisements contained ‘false and misleading statements’ regarding an Ayurvedic drug/medicine, making disparaging comparisons with Dabur Chyawanprash.
Additionally, Dabur argued that Patanjali’s ads falsely claimed other manufacturers lacked knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and traditional chyawanprash formulations.