Patanjali Ayurved on Friday approached the Delhi High Court challenging a single judgeโs order that restrained it from running advertisements disparaging Dabur Chyawanprash. However, a division bench gave strong oral observations, terming the case one of โgeneric disparagementโ and cautioning the company against pursuing โluxury litigation.โ
A bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla noted that the language used in Patanjaliโs advertisements left little doubt that Dabur was the target. โYou have said, โWhy settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?โ The moment you say โordinary chyawanprash with 40 herbs,โ you are making a representation to the public that the respondentโs chyawanprash is ordinary and yours is excellent,โ the bench observed.
The court said there was no reason for it to interfere with the interim injunction already granted by the single judge on July 3. โThese are plainly disparaging content,โ the bench said, citing another line from the ads: โJinko Ayurved or Vedon ka gyaan nahiโฆ original Chyawanprash kaise bana payenge.โ According to the judges, such language paints all other manufacturers as ignorant of Ayurvedic traditions and therefore incapable of making authentic chyawanprash.
The bench further warned Patanjali of possible costs if the appeal was found meritless. โIf 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 are not going to allow โaaltu faaltuโ appeals for everything. You have lots of money so you can file an appeal in every case,โ the bench remarked.
Patanjaliโs counsel sought time to consult his clients, following which the court listed the matter for further hearing on September 23.
Earlier, the single judge had restrained Patanjali from using the phrase โWhy settle for ordinary chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?โ in print ads and ordered modifications in Hindi versions as well. The judge had also taken note of the television commercial narrated by yoga guru Ramdev, stressing that his stature as a Vedic expert lent greater weight to the disparaging narrative.
Dabur, in its plea, argued that Patanjaliโs campaign for โPatanjali Special Chyawanprashโ directly targeted Dabur by branding its chyawanprash as โordinaryโ and misleadingly suggesting that other manufacturers lacked knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and formulations. It alleged that such claims amounted to false, misleading, and generic disparagement in violation of advertising norms.
The interim injunction will remain in force until the appeal is decided.
