The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief to CEAT Ltd. in its legal battle against Apollo Tyres, following CEAT’s claim that an advertisement for Apollo’s APTERRA AT2 tyres unfairly disparaged its CROSSDRIVE AT tyres [Ceat Ltd. v. Apollo Tyres Ltd.].
Justice RI Chagla, while granting the relief, observed that the ad’s primary aim appeared to “denigrate and slander” CEAT’s products, potentially causing “irreparable harm” to the company’s reputation. The court ordered Apollo Tyres to immediately cease broadcasting, promoting, or sharing the advertisement on any platform. Additionally, Apollo was directed to remove the ad from all websites and refrain from making any disparaging statements about CEAT’s products.
The court also prohibited Apollo from using terms like “SETH” and “SEE-IT,” which were featured in the ad, as they were found to be phonetically similar to CEAT’s trademark. This restriction applies to any visual or spoken use of these words that could cause confusion with CEAT’s registered trademark.
The next hearing is scheduled for October 11.
CEAT discovered the ad on YouTube on September 4. The video featured two Mahindra THAR SUVs: a worn-out black one representing CEAT’s CROSSDRIVE AT tyres, and a new maroon one showcasing Apollo’s APTERRA AT2 tyres. In the ad, the black SUV, symbolizing CEAT’s tyres, laments its poor condition, saying, “Meri halat dekh ke lagta hai?” and “SEE-IT, SEE-IT!… road ne toh ghis di yaar… meri grip.” Meanwhile, the maroon SUV, representing Apollo’s tyres, mocks the black SUV and suggests, “Just Go The Distance.”
CEAT argued that this portrayal misled viewers by unfairly depicting its tyres as worn-out and of inferior quality, with the CEAT logo deliberately blurred. CEAT’s Senior Advocate Virag Tulzapurkar, along with Advocate Hiren Kamod, contended that the ad created a negative impression of CEAT’s tyres, and the disclaimer in the ad was barely visible, making it ineffective.
The court concurred with CEAT’s arguments, finding that the depiction of CEAT’s tyres and the use of terms like “SEE-IT” and “SETH” were not coincidental but intended to bias viewers. The court deemed the disclaimer insufficient and thus granted interim relief in favor of CEAT.
Senior Advocate Virag Tulzapurkar, along with Advocates Hiren Kamod, Vinod Bhagat, Prachi Shah, and VA Bhagat, represented CEAT in the case.
