RECKITT BENCKISER (INDIA) LTD. Vs. HINDUSTAN UNILEVER LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CAUSE THAT GAVE RISE TO THE CONTROVERSY: The parties filed suits against each other objecting to the advertisement that according to them was an act of disparagement. There are altogether four suits being C.S. Nos. 56, 87, 90 and 92 of 2013. Hindustan Unilever Ltd. filed the first two suits whereas Reckitt Benckiser India Ltd. filed the other two. The products involved are Dettol antiseptic liquid, Lifebuoy bath soap, Vim cleansing liquid and Dettol cleansing liquid. Dettol antiseptic liquid was a drug within the meaning of Drug and Cosmetics Act and Lifebuoy soap would operate in the bathing field. The two liquids of the rival companies would, however, operate in the same field that is cleaning of the utensils.

(2.) Four advertisements would be as under:

(3.) Advertisement No. 2 would also relate to Dettol that would compare a new Dettol that improved its efficiency to kill germs that would be 100 per cent better. This advertisement would relate to C.S. No. 56, concerning a television advertisement almost similar to the first advertisement as above. The only difference would be a bottle of yellow liquid with the mark Vim was introduced to show the half part of the plate was cleaned that had the use of Dettol whereas the other part cleaned by Vim would have many black marks.