<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday restrained Patanjali from running disparaging advertisements against Dabur Chyawanprash.</p><p>Justice Mini Pushkarna allowed the interim injunction on Dabur's plea, which alleged "Patanjali Special Chyawanprash" was "disparaging DABUR Chyawanprash specifically" and Chyawanprash in general, by claiming that "no other manufacturer has the knowledge to prepare Chyawanprash" -- constituting generic disparagement.</p><p>"In addition, false and misleading statements made in the advertisements (in respect of an ayurvedic drug/medicine), in disparaging comparison with DABUR Chyawanprash," the petition claimed.</p>.Allahabad High Court rejects Patanjali Ayurved's plea against Rs 273.5 crore GST penalty.<p>Advocates Jawahar Lala and Meghna Kumar appeared for Dabur.</p><p>The petition further claimed the advertisement used the prefix "ordinary" with respect to all other Chyawanprash, denoting that they were "inferior".</p><p>The advertisement also made "untrue" claims that all other manufacturers had no knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and the formulae used to prepare Chyawanprash, it added.</p><p>The court posted the next hearing on July 14.</p>
<p>New Delhi: The Delhi High Court on Thursday restrained Patanjali from running disparaging advertisements against Dabur Chyawanprash.</p><p>Justice Mini Pushkarna allowed the interim injunction on Dabur's plea, which alleged "Patanjali Special Chyawanprash" was "disparaging DABUR Chyawanprash specifically" and Chyawanprash in general, by claiming that "no other manufacturer has the knowledge to prepare Chyawanprash" -- constituting generic disparagement.</p><p>"In addition, false and misleading statements made in the advertisements (in respect of an ayurvedic drug/medicine), in disparaging comparison with DABUR Chyawanprash," the petition claimed.</p>.Allahabad High Court rejects Patanjali Ayurved's plea against Rs 273.5 crore GST penalty.<p>Advocates Jawahar Lala and Meghna Kumar appeared for Dabur.</p><p>The petition further claimed the advertisement used the prefix "ordinary" with respect to all other Chyawanprash, denoting that they were "inferior".</p><p>The advertisement also made "untrue" claims that all other manufacturers had no knowledge of Ayurvedic texts and the formulae used to prepare Chyawanprash, it added.</p><p>The court posted the next hearing on July 14.</p>