Delhi High Court Seeks Patanjali’s Response to Dabur’s Allegations Over Chyawanprash Advertisement

The ongoing legal dispute between consumer goods heavyweights Dabur and Patanjali Ayurved highlights the challenges faced in competitive markets, especially when advertising claims clash with regulatory frameworks. This case has gained significant attention due to the prominent status of both brands in India’s Ayurvedic and FMCG sectors.

Background of the Dispute

Dabur, which holds a dominant 61.6% share of the Chyawanprash market, filed a lawsuit claiming that Patanjali’s advertisements make false and disparaging claims about its product. The advertisements, aired on major TV channels and published in newspapers like Dainik Jagran, promote Patanjali Special Chyawanprash as the “original” and “best” Chyawanprash in the market.

Key Claims in the Advertisement:

• Patanjali’s Chyawanprash is made following the “original method” rooted in Ayurvedic traditions.
• Competing brands lack knowledge of Ayurveda and Vedic practices, implying their products are inferior.

Dabur asserts that these claims are not only misleading but also harm its reputation and consumer trust.

Court’s Initial Orders

On December 24, Justice Mini Pushkarna issued the following directives:

• Summons Issued: Patanjali Ayurved and its subsidiary, Patanjali Foods Ltd., have been summoned to respond to the lawsuit.
• Response Deadline: Patanjali must file a written statement within 30 days.
• Hearing Date: The next hearing is scheduled for January 30.
• Interim Relief Sought: Dabur has requested an injunction to immediately halt the airing and publication of the advertisements.

Dabur’s Allegations: What’s at Stake?

Dabur’s lawsuit accuses Patanjali of:

1. False Advertising: Claiming exclusivity in following ancient Ayurvedic texts like Charak Samhita and Sushrut Samhita.
2. Disparaging Competing Brands: Suggesting that non-Patanjali brands are inferior or unsafe.
3. Misleading Consumers: Creating doubt about the quality and authenticity of other Chyawanprash products.

Additionally, Dabur argues that Patanjali’s claims:

• Violate the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, which mandates specific formulations for Ayurvedic medicines like Chyawanprash.
• Contradict regulatory advisories issued by the Ministry of AYUSH, warning against deceptive advertising practices.

Dabur has emphasized the need for immediate action to protect its market position and consumer trust.

Impact on Consumer Perception

Dabur alleges that Patanjali’s extensive promotional campaign has already caused significant damage:

• Widespread Reach: The ad has been aired over 900 times in three days across leading TV channels.
• Print Media Influence: Published in major newspapers, including the Delhi edition of Dainik Jagran.
• Market Dynamics: Such aggressive campaigns influence consumer perception, potentially impacting Dabur’s sales and brand equity.

Patanjali’s Defense

Patanjali has questioned the maintainability of the lawsuit and sought additional time to prepare its response. The company has yet to issue a detailed rebuttal but maintains that its advertisements are truthful and compliant with regulatory norms.

Judge’s Suggestion: During initial proceedings, the judge recommended mediation as a potential solution to the dispute. However, Dabur insisted on urgent relief, prompting the court to proceed with the hearing.

Why This Case Matters

This legal battle is not just a clash between two brands—it raises broader questions about:

1. Advertising Ethics: How far can brands go in promoting their products while referencing competitors?
2. Consumer Rights: Ensuring consumers are not misled by false or exaggerated claims.
3. Regulatory Oversight: The role of regulatory bodies like the Ministry of AYUSH in preventing misleading advertisements in the Ayurvedic product market.

The outcome of this case could set a precedent for advertising practices in highly competitive industries, particularly in the FMCG and Ayurvedic sectors.

Broader Context: Competition in the Chyawanprash Market

Chyawanprash, a traditional Ayurvedic health supplement, has a significant market in India, valued at over ₹1,000 crore. Major players include Dabur, which leads the market, and Patanjali, which has emerged as a strong competitor with its aggressive marketing and pricing strategies.

Dabur’s lawsuit reflects the intense competition in this segment and the increasing scrutiny of advertising practices as companies vie for consumer trust and market share.

What’s Next?

The Delhi High Court will hear the case again on January 30, where it will consider Dabur’s plea for interim relief and Patanjali’s response. If mediation is pursued, it could pave the way for an amicable resolution. However, if the case proceeds to trial, it could have far-reaching implications for advertising norms and competition in the Ayurvedic market.