New Delhi, Jul 3 (PTI) The Delhi High Court on Thursday restrained Patanjali from running disparaging advertisements against Dabur Chyawanprash, saying a strong prima facie case of disparagement was apparent in both TV and print ads.

Justice Mini Pushkarna allowed the interim injunction on Dabur's plea and directed Patanjali to delete 'Why settle for ordinary Chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?' from the print advertisements and accordingly modify it in Hindi.

"Similarly, as regards the TVC, the defendants are directed to delete the lines as given in the first three columns of the table showing 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, original Chyawanprash kaise bana payenge'. Similarly, the defendants are directed to delete the lines as given in the last column of the table showing the story board of the TVC, 'Toh ordinary Chyawanprash kyu', from their TVC," the judge said.

The bench said Patanjali shall be allowed to run the print and TV advertisements after the modifications.

The judge noted that the TV commercial (TVC) was narrated by Ramdev, who is an acknowledged yoga and vedic expert and appears in person in the advertisement, and said that the narrative of the commercial assumes more importance coming from the mouth of a person popularly known to be an expert in the field.

"The said statement in the TVC, in addition to being false, is also misleading for the reason that the impression created by the defendants, with Ramdev as the brand ambassador, is that only the defendants have the knowledge of Ayurveda and Vedas, and can make original Chyawanprash, as per the traditions. Whereas, fact of the matter is that Chyawanprash is an ayurvedic medicine as defined under Section 3(a) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, as noted above. There is no mandate/requirement for a manufacturer to first have 'knowledge' of Ayurveda and Vedas to make Chyawanprash. A manufacturer can make Chyawanprash by following the recipe/formulae, as prescribed," the bench said.

The judge said while it may be open for Patanjali to state that 'Patanjali Special Chyawanprash' is the best, it was not open for them to state that other manufacturers of Chyawanprash lacked the necessary knowledge and technical know-how to prepare the same as per ayurvedic texts as the same is firstly, untrue and secondly, misleading to the public at large.

"To convey a message through the advertisements that only Patanjali follows the tradition established by great sages, is incorrect and disparages the entire class of Chyawanprash in general. The defendants cannot rubbish the plaintiff or other manufacturers, who manufacture Chyawanprash strictly as per the enlisted ayurvedic scriptures, as ordinary," the judge said.

Further, as long as Dabur or any other manufacturer of Chyawanprash, has a drug licence and manufactures as per the Ayurveda books as detailed in the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, they cannot be said to not have knowledge of Ayurveda, the judge said.

"This is clearly a false statement, and does not fall within puffery. Acclamation of one's products and even stating that they are better than those of the rival is not actionable. However, false representation as to the quality or character of the competitor's products would fall in the category of disparagement," the judge said.

The court further said that it could not ignore the diverse and widespread viewership of television channels and electronic media as electronic advertisements have a larger audience pool and a deeper impact on the viewers, affecting their choices and preferences.

"The TVC, in its manner of presentation as well as intent, seeks to disparage the entire class of Chyawanprash," the judge said.

The petition filed by Dabur alleged "Patanjali Special Chyawanprash" was "disparaging DABUR Chyawanprash specifically" and Chyawanprash in general, by claiming that "no other manufacturer has the knowledge to prepare Chyawanprash" -- constituting generic disparagement.

"In addition, false and misleading statements made in the advertisements (in respect of an ayurvedic drug/medicine), in disparaging comparison with DABUR Chyawanprash," the petition claimed.

Advocates Jawahar Lala and Meghna Kumar appeared for Dabur.

The petition further claimed the advertisement used the prefix "ordinary" with respect to all other Chyawanprash, denoting that they were "inferior".

The advertisement also made "untrue" claims that all other manufacturers had no knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and the formulae used to prepare Chyawanprash, it added.

The court posted the next hearing on July 14. PTI UK ZMN