In Dabur vs Patanjali Fight Over Chyawanprash, A Court Warning For Ramdev

Delhi High Court Issues Stern Warning to Patanjali in Chyawanprash Advertising Dispute with Dabur

Dabur has consistently maintained that Patanjali's advertisements undermined consumer trust established over multiple generations.

New Delhi:

The Delhi High Court has issued a stern warning to Patanjali Ayurved Ltd and Patanjali Foods Ltd regarding their ongoing appeal in the advertising dispute with Dabur India over chyawanprash, cautioning that continued pursuit of the challenge could result in financial penalties if not withdrawn.

During this week's hearing, a division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Om Prakash Shukla expressed disapproval of Patanjali's decision to contest a previous ruling that required only the removal of specific disparaging elements from its advertising campaign. The justices emphasized that the July order did not demand complete advertisement withdrawal but merely directed Patanjali to eliminate particular objectionable content.

The dispute originated in December 2024 when Dabur, a longstanding major player in India's consumer goods sector, approached the Delhi High Court to challenge Patanjali's chyawanprash advertising campaign. Dabur claimed that Patanjali's promotional assertions were misleading, defamatory and damaging to its established reputation.

Dabur, which has been marketing chyawanprash for decades, contended that Patanjali's advertisements implied that competing products, including Dabur's own, contained mercury and were consequently unsafe for children. Additionally, Dabur disputed Patanjali's assertion that its chyawanprash incorporated 51 herbs, while suggesting Dabur's formulation contained only 40.

Dabur has consistently maintained that Patanjali's advertisements undermined consumer trust established over multiple generations.

Patanjali, co-established by yoga guru Ramdev and Acharya Balkrishna, justified its campaign as legitimate product promotion. The company asserted that its advertisements neither specifically named Dabur nor made explicit comparative claims.

The company further argued that the contested statements were derived from publicly available information, including product labeling, and therefore could not be considered misleading.

On July 3, 2025, Justice Mini Pushkarna, in a single-judge capacity at the Delhi High Court, issued an interim order addressing Dabur's petition. The ruling directed Patanjali to remove the phrase "Why settle for ordinary Chyawanprash made with 40 herbs?" from its print advertisements.

Furthermore, Patanjali was instructed to modify its television commercial by eliminating storyboard segments suggesting that only those with Ayurvedic expertise could produce "original Chyawanprash." The judge clarified that Patanjali remained free to continue its campaign provided these specific modifications were implemented.

Subsequently, Patanjali challenged this order before the Commercial Appellate Division of the Delhi High Court, arguing that the ruling contradicted established principles governing commercial speech and promotional puffery. The company maintained that its right to emphasize its product's distinctive qualities should not be restricted.

When the case appeared before Justices Hari Shankar and Shukla, the bench expressed clear disapproval of the appeal. Noting that the single judge had only issued limited directives requiring removal of specific disparaging content, the bench suggested Patanjali's challenge was unwarranted.

The court ultimately presented Patanjali with a clear choice: withdraw the appeal or potentially face imposed costs.