https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155654 Comparative advertising is permissible only when it remains puffery and does not denigrate a rival product or class of products. The Delhi High Court treated the impugned commercial as generic disparagement of Lal Dant Manjan tooth powders, holding that a rival class can be targeted by implication even without expressly naming the manufacturer or product. On interim relief, the Court found a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury in favour of the plaintiff, and restrained further telecast of the television commercial. The note emphasises that attacks on a class of goods within which the plaintiff falls may justify injunctive relief. en-us Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 07 Jun 2024 11:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155654 Comparative advertising is permissible only when it remains puffery and does not denigrate a rival product or class of products. The Delhi High Court treated the impugned commercial as generic disparagement of Lal Dant Manjan tooth powders, holding that a rival class can be targeted by implication even without expressly naming the manufacturer or product. On interim relief, the Court found a prima facie case, balance of convenience, and irreparable injury in favour of the plaintiff, and restrained further telecast of the television commercial. The note emphasises that attacks on a class of goods within which the plaintiff falls may justify injunctive relief. Case-Laws Companies Law Thu, 09 Sep 2004 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=155654