https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239573 Comparative advertising remains lawful only when it praises the advertiser's own product without denigrating a rival's. Applying a common-consumer perspective, the Court found that the television commercial, through its portrayal of a sick child, repeated reference to "two dhakkans," and visual similarity to the plaintiff's antiseptic liquid, conveyed that the plaintiff's product was ineffective while the defendant's soap offered superior germ protection. That message crossed the line from puffery into disparagement. The plaintiff therefore established a strong prima facie case, the balance of convenience favoured protection of goodwill, and interim restraint was justified to avoid irreparable harm. en-us Mon, 13 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Nov 2013 11:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239573 Comparative advertising remains lawful only when it praises the advertiser's own product without denigrating a rival's. Applying a common-consumer perspective, the Court found that the television commercial, through its portrayal of a sick child, repeated reference to "two dhakkans," and visual similarity to the plaintiff's antiseptic liquid, conveyed that the plaintiff's product was ineffective while the defendant's soap offered superior germ protection. That message crossed the line from puffery into disparagement. The plaintiff therefore established a strong prima facie case, the balance of convenience favoured protection of goodwill, and interim restraint was justified to avoid irreparable harm. Case-Laws Companies Law Mon, 13 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239573