Justice Mini Pushkarna allowed Dabur\u2019s interim injunction plea which alleged \u201cPatanjali Special Chyawanprash\u201d was \u201cdisparaging DABUR Chyawanprash specifically\u201d and chyawanprash in general, by claiming that \u201cno other manufacturer has the knowledge to prepare chyawanprash\u201d.<\/p>\n
The high court posted the matter for further hearing on July 14.<\/p>\n
\u201cJinko Ayurved aur Vedo ka gyaan nahi, Charak, Sushrut, Dhanwantari aur Chyawanrishi ke parampara mei \u2018original\u2019 Chyawanprash kaise bana payenge?\u201d read the alleged advertisement in question.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn addition, false and misleading statements made in the advertisements (in respect of an ayurvedic drug\/medicine), in disparaging comparison with DABUR Chyawanprash,\u201d the petition claimed.<\/p>\n
Dabur objected to specific references in Patanjali’s advertisements calling a 40-herb chyawanprash \u201cordinary\u201d, denoting that all other chyawanprash were “inferior”.<\/p>\n
The advertisement also made “untrue” claims that all other manufacturers had no knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and the formulae used to prepare chyawanprash, it submitted.<\/p>\n
To label other brands as \u201cordinary\u201d was both misleading and harmful, Dabur submitted.<\/p>\n
Maintaining that chyawanprash was a classic Ayurvedic medicine regulated under the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, which mandates adherence to prescribed formulations based on ancient ayurvedic texts, Dabur contended that the ad misled consumers and undermined their confidence in a category of products governed by strict regulatory standards.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"The Delhi High Court on Thursday restrained Patanjali from running \u2018disparaging\u2019 advertisements against Dabur Chyawanprash and questioning the…\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":39520,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[34],"tags":[31616,31617,31618,31619,31620,1250,28609,31621,210,31622,1060,28611,67,132,68],"class_list":{"0":"post-39519","1":"post","2":"type-post","3":"status-publish","4":"format-standard","5":"has-post-thumbnail","7":"category-medication","8":"tag-advertisingdispute","9":"tag-chyawanprashcontroversy","10":"tag-healthsupplements","11":"tag-interiminjunction","12":"tag-patanjalivsdabur","13":"tag-ayurveda","14":"tag-dabur","15":"tag-delhihighcourt","16":"tag-health","17":"tag-legalbattle","18":"tag-medication","19":"tag-patanjali","20":"tag-united-states","21":"tag-unitedstates","22":"tag-us"},"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@us\/114798003858629821","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39519","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=39519"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/39519\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/39520"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=39519"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=39519"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=39519"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}