In response to Marico’s lawsuit, the Delhi High Court banned Dabur’s advertisement of Amla hair oil on WhatsApp.
Posted Date – Tue, 06 Jun 23 at 05:32pm
Untitled 1
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has issued a restraining order against Indian multinational consumer goods company Dabur from posting a WhatsApp ad for ‘Dabur Amla Hair Oil’ featuring Bollywood actor Deepika Padukone.
The single bench of Justice Navin Chawla passed the order in response to a lawsuit brought by Marico Limited seeking an advertising interim injunction to prevent Dabur from disseminating or forwarding print advertisements for its WhatsApp and Amla hair oils.
It also claimed that Dabur’s advertisements demeaned the reputation and goodwill of its product “Nihar Natural Shanti Badam Amla Hair Oil” and its registered “Nihar” trademark.
The court stated that Marico failed to establish a prima facie case against print advertisements but did establish a prima facie case regarding WhatsApp messages/advertisements.
Regarding the print ad, Marico felt that Dabur’s opening line “Yaad Rakhna, Sasta Amla, balo ko mehenga padega” (remember, cheap Amla will cost your hair a lot of money) was shocking and threatening to consumers, implying other cheap Amla Pomade inferior and harmful to call it universally demeaning.
While the court declined to ban the print ads, it limited Dabur and his associates from disseminating WhatsApp messages or ads for Amla hair oil while Marico’s lawsuit was pending.
With regard to the absence of any explicit reference to Marico in the challenged print advertisement, the court said any such reference required a leap of the imagination, which it considered unfounded.
The court held that the ad merely suggested the potential negative quality and price implications of using the cheaper Amla pomade.
Judge Chawla also emphasized that the advertisement should be evaluated from the perspective of the average consumer, who might view it as bragging, and not from the perspective of a sensitive competitor like Marico.
The court concluded that the ad merely expressed the opinion that buying the cheaper Amla pomade could be harmful to the hair, but that it did not defame all pomades that cost less than Marico’s products.
With regard to the dissemination of the WhatsApp advertisements in question, the court noted that the average consumer does not access both WhatsApp messages/ads and print advertisements. The connection between the two can only be established by individuals who receive WhatsApp ads and print ads.
