Delhi High Court Sends Patanjali–Britannia ‘Milk Bikis’ Ad Row To Mediation, Notes Humour In Ads Is Subjective
Delhi High Court Sends Patanjali–Britannia ‘Milk Bikis’ Ad Row To Mediation, Notes Humour In Ads Is Subjective
Introduction
The Delhi High Court has referred to mediation a trademark disparagement dispute between Patanjali Ayurved Limited and Britannia Industries Limited concerning Britannia’s “Milk Bikis” advertisement. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, while hearing preliminary submissions, observed that “what is humorous for you might not be for the competitor,” and directed the parties to explore an amicable settlement.
Factual Background
Patanjali has sought an injunction against Britannia’s “Milk Bikis” commercial, alleging that the advertisement disparages its milk biscuits. The plaintiff objected to the depiction of its packaging and the use of the word “Baba” in the advertisement, contending that it unfairly targets and demeans its brand. Britannia, on the other hand, described the commercial as a permissible comparative advertisement presented in a humorous tone.
Procedural Background
The matter came up before the Delhi High Court for preliminary hearing. After hearing both sides, the Court referred the dispute to the Delhi Mediation and Conciliation Centre and appointed Senior Advocate Rajeev Virmani as mediator. The case is scheduled to be taken up before the mediation centre and will thereafter be listed again before the Court.
Issues
1. Whether Britannia’s “Milk Bikis” advertisement amounts to trademark disparagement of Patanjali’s product.
2. Whether depiction of Patanjali’s packaging in the advertisement is permissible under comparative advertising principles.
3. Whether the use of the word “Baba” in the advertisement constitutes disparagement.
Contentions of the Parties
Patanjali contended that the advertisement disparages its product and objected specifically to the depiction of its packaging and the reference to “Baba.”
Britannia argued that comparative advertising is legally permissible and that “truthful disparagement” is allowed under law. It submitted that the commercial was intended as a humorous comparison and that the law permits depiction of a competitor’s product image.
When the Court suggested blurring Patanjali’s packaging, Britannia initially resisted, stating that the message would lose clarity if the image was obscured. However, upon instructions, Britannia agreed to completely give up use of the word “Baba” in all future versions of the advertisement, subject to limited exceptions for already printed material for two days in specified States.
Reasoning and Analysis
The Court observed that advertising is often subjective and that what may appear humorous to one party may not be so to a competitor. It emphasised the importance of balancing freedom of commercial speech with protection against disparagement. Recognising the possibility of an amicable resolution, the Court deemed it appropriate to refer the matter to mediation rather than adjudicate the dispute at the interim stage.
Decision
The Delhi High Court referred the dispute to the Delhi Mediation and Conciliation Centre and appointed Senior Advocate Rajeev Virmani as mediator. Britannia agreed to discontinue use of the word “Baba” in future advertisements, subject to limited exceptions. The matter will be taken up before the Court again after mediation proceedings.
