Delhi High Court restrains startup Beco from running ads against HUL products

A single-judge bench of The Delhi High Court has restrained home-care startup BECO from running an advertising campaign that allegedly linked Hindustan Unilever Ltd’s (HUL) Vim and Surf Excel products to skin irritation and allergies.

“I am injunctioning your ad campaign" Justice Anup Jairam Bhambhami said.

At the centre of the dispute is Beco’s ‘#WarOnWhatsHidden’ marketing campaign, which names HUL’s products and highlights synthetic compounds such as benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and linear alkylbenzene sulfonate (LAS), claiming its own versions of these products don’t contain these ingredients.

HUL told the court that while companies are free to advertise their own merchandise, claiming that a competitor’s goods are physically harmful crosses into unlawful defamation.

The court said the campaign was likely to make consumers believe that HUL products themselves were harmful and could “shake the consumer’s confidence” in products they had been using.

“An average consumer, or for that matter any non-expert, would neither bother nor have the expertise to analyze or deconstruct the narrative contained in the impugned campaign, nor would they reason with themselves or undertake a critical, scientific analysis of whether the statements contained in the impugned campaign are true,” read the order copy seen by Mint.

The court said the campaign was not merely comparative advertising aimed at praising Beco’s products, but denigrated HUL’s products while being presented scientifically verified.

“The impugned campaign further cites complex chemical names, proportions, and percentages of the harmful ingredients to give the viewer a sense of certitude that the plaintiff’s products are risky to use. In the opinion of this court, in doing so, the defendant prima facie crosses the permissible contours of comparative advertising,” the order read.

Companies respond

Beco co-founder Aditya Ruia said in response to Mint's queries, "Beco will comply fully with the terms of the order. We respect the court’s process and are considering the appropriate next steps with our lawyers. We will continue to stand by what we believe is right for our consumers.” He thanked Beco’s customers, partners, vendors, teams and everyone who has stood by the company, adding that the quality, transparency and honesty of Beco's products remains unchanged.

HUL welcomed the judgement. "At HUL, we believe that consumer trust is built on responsible advertising. Fair competition must be rooted in truthful communication and respect for intellectual property and the reputation of competing brands," a company spokesperson said.

The spokesperson added that HUL is committed to ensuring all its products are formulated, manufactured and safety-assessed in accordance with regulatory requirements and rigorous global safety standards.

Jurisdiction plea rejected

On 2 September, a division bench of the high court passed an order rejecting Mumbai-based Beco’s objection to the case being heard in Delhi. The startup argued that the head offices of both HUL and Beco were registered in Mumbai, and the hoarding was put up there. However, the bench noted that Beco had also put up hoardings in Delhi and that its Goods and Services Tax (GST) office was registered in the national capital.

The division bench said its ruling on jurisdiction was final and sent the case to the single-judge bench to be heard on merit. The court explicitly barred Beco from re-agitating the jurisdiction issue, according to a copy of the order that Mint has seen.

Senior counsel Amit Sibal, representing HUL, argued before the single judge on 7 September that Beco had crossed the limits of permissible comparative advertising by portraying HUL's products as harmful and urging consumers to switch to its products.

Founded by Aditya Ruia, Akshay Varma, and Anuj Ruia in 2019, Beco makes eco-friendly consumer products in the home care and personal care segments, including dishwashing liquid, floor cleaner, laundry liquid, facial tissues, and bamboo toothbrushes. Its investors include Titan Capital Winners Fund, Asian Paints promoter Manish Choksi, Rukam Capital and Synergy Capital, among others.

The startup reported revenue of ₹111 crore in FY25, with a loss of ₹21.7 crore, according to market intelligence platform Tracxn.