New Delhi: In a nuanced verdict balancing advertising freedom and brand protection, the Delhi High Court on Tuesday partially relaxed an earlier injunction against Patanjali Ayurved, allowing the use of the term “ordinary Chyawanprash” in its advertising—but prohibiting any reference that implicitly targets Dabur’s formulation of “40 herbs.”
A Division Bench comprising Justices Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla modified a prior ruling that had fully restrained Patanjali from using the tagline, “Why settle for ordinary Chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?” The Court held that while puffery and self-praise are permissible in competitive advertising, identifying a rival’s product directly or indirectly can amount to disparagement.
Key Legal Clarification on Advertising
“At the highest, what remains is puffery,” the Bench observed, emphasizing that the mere use of the word “ordinary” does not in itself constitute disparagement. The Court further remarked that modern comparative advertising allows for claims such as “I am the best and others are not as good,” as long as they do not cross into misleading or defamatory territory.
This decision concludes Patanjali’s appeal against a July 2025 order by Justice Mini Pushkarna, who had previously found elements of the brand’s “Special Chyawanprash” campaign to be misleading and disparaging, particularly toward Dabur, the market leader with over 60% share in the Chyawanprash segment.
Dispute Over Ayurvedic Authenticity and Market Messaging
Dabur had approached the Court alleging that Patanjali’s campaign falsely portrayed its product as inauthentic and inferior, leveraging statements like “ordinary Chyawanprash” and references to “40 herbs,” which consumers would associate with Dabur’s long-standing Ayurvedic formulation.
Justice Pushkarna had earlier ordered Patanjali to remove references suggesting that only those with Ayurvedic expertise could make “original Chyawanprash,” and to refrain from any implication that other products were substandard.
Patanjali, in its defence, argued that commercial advertising inherently involves subjective and promotional language, and maintained that the word “ordinary” was a neutral descriptor not aimed at Dabur or any specific competitor.
Final Outcome and Trial Ahead
With Tuesday’s ruling, the High Court permitted Patanjali to retain the use of “ordinary Chyawanprash” as a general comparative term but barred any mention or insinuation connecting it to the “40 herbs” formulation, which the Bench said clearly alluded to Dabur’s product.
Dabur accepted the revised injunction, and the Court clarified that all other substantive issues would be examined during the full trial.
The verdict marks a significant moment in Indian advertising law, reinforcing the line between legitimate brand promotion and unfair competitive targeting. For FMCG players operating in saturated categories like health supplements, the decision underlines the importance of responsible comparative advertising in an increasingly aggressive marketplace.
