Ghadi Vs Surf Excel: Delhi HC Orders Amending Ravi Kishan's Ads With 'Badi Badi Baatein', 'Dhoka Hai' Lines
The Delhi High Court has directed RSPL Limited, the maker of Ghadi detergent, to remove specific derogatory remarks aimed at Surf Excel from its television and online advertisements. The order came in response to a lawsuit filed by Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL), which produces Surf Excel. Justice Prathiba M Singh, presiding over the matter, instructed RSPL to revise the impugned commercials by 24 June 2025, failing which they cannot be aired.
“The Defendant (RSPL) shall carry out the proper amendments in the impugned advertisements by 24th June 2025 and only then telecast/broadcast the impugned commercials,” the judge ordered, as per Live Law.
Three Phrases Flagged as Derogatory
The Court identified three particular phrases in the advertisements that must be removed. According to the order, these statements were perceived to clearly refer to Surf Excel and were intended to undermine the brand.
The three expressions that were flagged include:
• “Aapka kare badi badi baatein par dho nahi paate” (Your product makes big claims but fails to clean),
• “Iske jhaag acche hai, daam acche hai” (Its foam is good, price is good), and
• “Na Na, yeh dhoka hai” (No, no, this is a fraud).
Justice Singh observed that these expressions were used in reference to the plaintiff’s product and appeared to parody HUL’s famous “Daag Acche Hai” campaign, Live Law's report stated.
HUL Challenges Campaign Featuring Ravi Kishan
The lawsuit was filed after HUL sent a cease-and-desist notice to RSPL on 7 June, which the latter declined. RSPL had launched four ads in early June 2025 promoting Ghadi detergent with actor Ravi Kishan.
HUL claimed that the advertisements mirrored key elements of Surf Excel’s identity—such as similar light and dark blue packaging, the usage of the term “XL Blue”, and slogans resembling its own branding. The company also stated that Surf Excel has been sold since 1996 and currently contributes an annual turnover of around ₹11,000 crore.
Court Reiterates Limits of Comparative Advertising
In its ruling, the Court reiterated that while comparative advertising is allowed, it must not cross into defamation.
“That it is permissible for an advertiser to undertake an advertising campaign to promote its own product so long as the same is not deliberately tarnishing or defaming the competitor’s product,” Justice Singh held, as quoted by the report.
She further stated that promotional puffery is allowed, but damaging a rival’s reputation is not.
The next hearing in the matter is scheduled for 16 July.
Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi represented HUL, along with advocates Saikrishna Rajagopal, Vivek Ayyagari, Julien George, Arjun Ghadhoke and Abhinav Bhalla from Saikrishna and Associates. RSPL was represented by Senior Advocate Chander M Lall, assisted by advocates Nancy Roy, Annanya Chug and Prashant from Lall and Sethi.
india