1 week ago
Urban Company Sues Kent RO Over Native Purifier Ads
Urban Company and Kent RO are arguing about advertisements for water purifiers.
Urban Company says Kent made false and misleading statements about its Native purifiers.
The statements concerned claims that the purifiers could use the same filter for two years and need no servicing for two years.
Urban Company says Kent called these features a “marketing gimmick.”
It also says Kent described the purifiers as unsafe and risky.
Urban Company took the matter to the Delhi High Court on August 11.
Kent told the court it would remove the advertisements and avoid similar claims.
The court recorded this promise but did not decide who was right about the purifier features.
Urban Company filed a defamation and product-disparagement suit against Kent RO Systems in the Delhi High Court on August 11.
The lawsuit concerns advertisements and influencer-linked social media content about Native M0, M1, M2, M1 Pro and M2 Pro purifiers.
Urban Company alleged that Kent called the products’ two-year filter life and no-servicing features a “marketing gimmick” and described them as “unsafe” and “risky.”
Kent told the court on August 12 that it would withdraw the disputed advertisements and avoid similar disparaging claims.
The court directed Kent to remove the advertisements and social media content within 15 days; it did not decide whether Urban Company’s product claims were accurate.
- Who
- Urban Company and Kent RO Systems.
- What
- Urban Company filed a defamation and product-disparagement suit alleging that Kent’s advertisements and social media content made misleading claims about Native water purifiers.
- Where
- The Delhi High Court.
- When
- The suit was filed on August 11, and the matter was heard on August 12; the court order was uploaded on August 22. One account identifies the filing year as 2026.
- Why
- Urban Company alleges that Kent’s campaign disparaged its products by challenging their two-year filter-life and two-year no-servicing features.
Urban Company’s allegations
Kent’s undertaking and court position
Advertising claims
Urban Company’s allegations
Urban Company alleged that Kent’s advertisements and influencer-linked social media content made false and misleading claims, calling Native purifier features a marketing gimmick and the products unsafe or risky.
Kent’s undertaking and court position
Kent agreed to withdraw the advertisements targeted by the lawsuit and said it would not publish the same or similar disparaging claims about qualifying purifiers.
Scope of future promotions
Urban Company’s allegations
Urban Company objected to promotional content targeting its claims about two-year filter life and two-year no-servicing features.
Kent’s undertaking and court position
Kent undertook not to run similar promotional material when it disparaged Urban Company.
Underlying merits
Urban Company’s allegations
Urban Company maintains that the advertising campaign disparaged its company and products.
Kent’s undertaking and court position
The court recorded Kent’s undertaking but did not determine whether Urban Company’s filter-life or no-servicing claims were correct or resolve the underlying allegations.
Key facts
- Plaintiff
- Urban Company
- Defendant
- Kent RO Systems
- Products mentioned
- Native M0, M1, M2, M1 Pro and M2 Pro water purifiers
- Disputed claims
- Two-year filter life and two-year service life or no-servicing feature
- Alleged advertising language
- Urban Company said Kent described the features as a “marketing gimmick” and the purifiers as “unsafe” and “risky.”
- Court undertaking
- Kent said it would withdraw the disputed advertisements and avoid the same or similar disparaging promotional claims.
- Removal deadline
- Within 15 days of August 12
- Other litigation
- The companies also have patent, counterclaim and tortious-interference disputes; Urban Company separately alleged that its Native purifiers were removed from e-commerce platforms.
Sources
Related news
HUL Challenges Beco Campaign Targeting Surf Excel and Vim
Delhi High Court Questions Jurisdiction in HUL-Beco Ad Dispute
Delhi HC Seeks The Caravan Reply in Gadkari Defamation Case
Delhi High Court stays FSSAI ban on Dabur's '100%' claims
Delhi High Court Stays FSSAI Order on Dabur 100% Claims
TCL sues Samsung over alleged false Mini LED advertising
Internet Stocks Rally as MSCI Rejig Boosts IPO Activity
Seven Water Purifiers Under Rs 15,000 Compared For Indian Homes
Delhi-Born Entrepreneur Explains Why He Prefers Gurugram Despite Civic Problems
India’s Public Market Fundraising May Hit Record ₹6.5 Trillion
India’s Gig Economy Growth Leaves Women Behind, Study Finds
