The Delhi High Court refrained Dabur from using WhatsApp advertisements that targeted Nihar Naturals. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla opined that a prima facie case has been established by the Plaintiff only with respect to WhatsApp Advertisement and therefore, Dabur was restrained from sending out such communications that disparaged the goodwill and reputation of Nihar Naturals.
Brief Facts:
A Petition was filed seeking ad interim injunction restraining the Defendant, its directors etc from disparaging the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff‟s product “Nihar Natural Shanti Badam Amla Hair Oil” and the registered Nihar trademarks.
Brief Background:
The Plaintiff, Nihar Naturals manufactures and markets various products, including packaged coconut oil, hair oil, personal care products, and food products, under well-known household brands.
Nihar Naturals became aware of a defamatory and denigrating WhatsApp message circulating in the market, targeting their product "Nihar Naturals Shanti Badam Amla Hair Oil." The message also mentioned a disparaging print advertisement by Defendant, Dabur, for its "Dabur Amla Hair Oil" product.
Consequently, Nihar Naturals filed a lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction to prevent the defendants from publishing or circulating the impugned WhatsApp and print advertisements.
Contentions of the Plaintiffs:
It was argued that Defendant's print advertisement was defamatory and denigrating and that it violated Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution. Further, it was also alleged that Defendant created and circulated the WhatsApp advertisement and made false statements and averments in Court.
Contentions of the Defendants:
It was argued that Plaintiff had concealed the fact that the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) had rejected Plaintiff's challenge to the defendant's use of the tagline "Asli Amla, Dabur Amla."
It was further contended that the Plaintiff was forum shopping by filing the lawsuit in the Delhi High Court, rather than the Bombay High Court, where the Plaintiff had previously challenged a similar advertisement.
Observations of the Court:
It was observed that Plaintiff had concealed and misrepresented facts regarding the proceedings before the Bombay High Court. Plaintiff selectively disclosed certain proceedings while suppressing others. The Court noted that the plaintiff had taken advantage of the previous proceedings when it suited them but now sought to distance themselves from those proceedings.
Furthermore, the High Court rules that the Plaintiff had engaged in forum shopping by filing a similar suit before the Bombay High Court and then filing the suit in a different Court. The Court considered this as an attempt to bypass the earlier orders of the Bombay High Court.
It was opined that the tagline used by Defendant was a registered trademark and could not be injuncted without challenging the registration. The Court further noted that the other challenges raised by Plaintiff had already been considered by the Bombay High Court and ASCI, and therefore, they could not be grounds for granting an ad interim injunction.
Although the WhatsApp message showed that the print advertisement targeted the Plaintiff, it was concluded that the ordinary consumer would not have both the WhatsApp message and the print advertisement in front of them. Therefore, the connection between the two would only be apparent to those who received both. The Court ultimately decided not to injunct the print advertisement based on this connection but decided to refrain Dabur from sending WhatsApp communications targeting Plaintiff.
The decision of the Court:
The Delhi High Court refrained Defendants from using WhatsApp messages but dismissed the petition. Therefore, the defendants were restrained from circulating the WhatsApp message/Advertisement during the pendency of the suit.
Case Title: Marico Limited v Dabur India Limited
Case No.: Civil Suit Commercial 471 of 2022
Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Navin Chawla
Advocates for Plaintiffs: Advs.Mr.Akhil Sibal, Mr.Chander M Lall, Mr.Ankur Sangal, Ms.Pragya Mishra, Mr.Raghu Vinayak Sinha and Ms.Asavari Jain
Advocates for Defendants: Advs. Mr.Rajiv Nayar, Mr.R. Jawahar Lal, Mr.Siddharth Bawa, Mr.Anuj Garg, Mr.Anirudh Bakhru and Mr.Mohit Sharma
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com:
Picture Source :
