In our last post on the above subject captioned matter, we had covered the Brief Facts of the matter, the decision of the Learned Single Judge in the present matter and the key takeaways from the said decision. Pertinently, the Learned Single Judge had granted a temporary injunction towards the removal of said video. The…
The Bombay High Court in earlier part of the year 2020, has dealt with the case of permissible limits of action of viewers who review products or services. The decision is in the case of Marico Limited v. Abhijeet Bhansali[1] wherein the Learned Single Judge of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi restrained by an order…
Havells India Ltd. & Anr. v. Amritanshu Khaitan & Ors. 2015 (62) PTC 64 [Del] Brief Facts: Defendants released the below mentioned advertisement. In the said advertisement, the Defendant compared Eveready LED Bulb with Havells LED Bulb. Plaintiffs filed a Suit for Disparagement against the Plaintiff. Along with the suit, the Plaintiffs also filed an…
Philips India Pvt. Ltd. v. Shree Sant Kripa Appliances Pvt. Ltd.; 19.01.2015 (Delhi High Court) Plaintiff was manufacturer of CFLs having a 30% share in the market. Defendant launched an advertising campaign showing advantages of LEDs over CFLs. The Plaintiff filed a suit for false, misleading and disparaging representations. The Hon’ble Court relied on Dabur…
Dabur India Limited Vs. Colgate Palmolive India Ltd. 2004 (29) PTC 401 (Del) Plaintiff was the manufacturer of Dabur Lal Dant Manjan Powder. The bone of contention of the plaintiff was an advertisement in which Cinestar Sunil Shetty is seen stopping the purchasers of Lal Dant Manjan powder. He further informs them of the ill…
Dabur India Limited Vs.Emami Limited 2004 (29) PTC 1 (Del) Plaintiff was the manufacturer of Dabur Chayawanprash. Plaintiff had a market share of 63% of the total market of Chayawanprash in India. Defendant was also engaged in the manufacture of various ayurvedic formulations including Chayawanprash. Defendant was manufacturing the said Chayawanprash under the brand name…
Colgate Palmolive Company and Anr. v. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. FAO (OS) No. 396/2013 before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi at New Delhi Decided on: 10.12.2013 The Plaintiff filed a suit against the Defendant for permanent injunction restraining disparagement of it’s product Colgate Strong Teeth along with an application for interim relief. FACTS The Defendant had…