Back
SHEKHAR B. SARAF
Dabur India Limited – Appellant
Versus
Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt. Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Shekhar B. Saraf, J.
Facts:
1. The plaintiff/petitioner has filed the present suit against an advertising campaign containing five impugned advertisements issued by the defendant/respondent one after the other during October and November 2021 in relation to its product "Baidhyanath Chyawanprash Special". Details of the impugned advertisements are as follows:
Point of law: Under Section 3 (a) of the Drugs & Cosmetic Act, 1940 and as agreed by both parties, there can be no Chyawanprash available in the market with 42 ingredients
The main legal point established in the judgment is that while comparative advertising is permissible, an advertiser cannot denigrate or disparage a rival product. The court emphasized the importance....
The use of the term 'Sadharan' in advertisements does not inherently imply disparagement if the context suggests substantial differences between competing products.
Descriptors like 'ordinary' or 'sadharan' do not constitute disparagement unless linked to a specific product, balancing trademark protection with freedom of speech.
Commercial advertisements must promote without disparaging competitors; misleading claims are impermissible under protection afforded to commercial speech.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
