Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (1.79 seconds)
Documents citing Dabur India Ltd. vs Emami Limited on 3 July, 2019

Khadi And Village Industries ... vs Nitish Kumar And Anr. on 10 October, 2023

11. Dabur India Ltd v. Emami Ltd8 ("Dabur v Emami" hereinafter) is a case, submits Mr. Sibal, in which there was a far more direct attack than in the present case. The product under attack, by Emami, was "Chyawanprash". Dabur was not specifically named. Dabur's contention was that it was the market leader in Chyawanprash and that, therefore, the commercial was in effect an attack by proxy. The message that was sought to be conveyed was that 50% of 7 ILR (2010) 4 Del 489 Signature Not Verified 8 261 (2019) DLT 474 Digitally Signed By:HARIOM CS(OS) 582/2023 Page 17 of 102 Signing Date:10.10.2023 16:09:29 Chyawanprash was sugar and was, therefore, unhealthy, whereas Emami's "Chyawanprashad" had no sugar and was, therefore, healthy. Dabur sought to contend that Chyawanprash, as an Ayurvedic preparation, had necessarily to contain sugar. Despite this, submits Mr. Sibal, this Court did not find Emami's commercial to be disparaging of Dabur's Chyawanprash. Applying the approach adopted by the Division Bench in the said case would, submits Mr. Sibal, required the Court to, in the present case as well, hold that there is no disparagement.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - C H Shankar - Full Document

Tata Sons Private Limited & Anr. vs Puro Wellness Private Limited & Anr. on 10 October, 2023

11. Dabur India Ltd v. Emami Ltd8 ("Dabur v Emami" hereinafter) is a case, submits Mr. Sibal, in which there was a far more direct attack than in the present case. The product under attack, by Emami, was "Chyawanprash". Dabur was not specifically named. Dabur's contention was that it was the market leader in Chyawanprash and that, therefore, the commercial was in effect an attack by proxy. The message that was sought to be conveyed was that 50% of Chyawanprash was sugar and was, therefore, unhealthy, whereas 7 ILR (2010) 4 Del 489 Signature Not Verified 8 261 (2019) DLT 474 Digitally Signed By:HARIOM CS(OS) 582/2023 Page 17 of 101 Signing Date:11.10.2023 11:04:26 Emami's "Chyawanprashad" had no sugar and was, therefore, healthy. Dabur sought to contend that Chyawanprash, as an Ayurvedic preparation, had necessarily to contain sugar. Despite this, submits Mr. Sibal, this Court did not find Emami's commercial to be disparaging of Dabur's Chyawanprash. Applying the approach adopted by the Division Bench in the said case would, submits Mr. Sibal, required the Court to, in the present case as well, hold that there is no disparagement.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - C H Shankar - Full Document

Emami Limited vs Dabur India Limited on 11 September, 2024

3. We have considered the facts of the case and grounds on which transfer has been sought. On such consideration, we are satisfied with the grounds urged by the petitioner and accept the same. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by Neetu Khajuria Therefore, Civil Suit bearing C.S. No.121 of 2021 Date: 2024.09.12 18:12:07 IST Reason: along with all pending applications and Contempt Petition COPC No.463 of 2021 in the said suit titled 2 “Dabur India Limited vs. Emami Limited” pending before the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla is ordered to be transferred to the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Silvermaple Healthcare Services ... vs Dr Ajay Dubey & Ors. on 24 August, 2023

21. Though it is true that various Single Benches of this Court - including myself - have, in the past, been granting ad interim injunctive reliefs, often ex parte and on the very first date of hearing, 6 Dabur India Ltd v. Emami Ltd Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 570/2023 Page 20 of 28 Digitally Signed By:HARIOM Signing Date:28.08.2023 16:36:54 even where the defendant has been using the impugned mark, or where the longevity of user, by the defendant, of the impugned mark, is unknown, that position cannot, in my considered opinion, continue, in view of the afore extracted enunciation of the legal position by the Division Bench in Dabur6. If the defendant has been using the impugned mark, before the plaintiff instituted the suit, then, in all but, possibly, the most exceptional cases, the decision in Dabur6 would obligate the Court to extend, to the defendant, an opportunity to submit a written response to the prayer for interlocutory relief, before proceeding to pass orders thereon. As to whether there may be any exceptional case in which this procedure is not required to be followed, is a matter on which, for the present, I do not venture to express any definitive opinion. Suffice it to state, however, that the present is not one such case.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - C H Shankar - Full Document
1   2 3 Next