The Delhi High Court has directed that no precipitative action be taken against Emami Agrotech Limited over its “Emami Healthy & Tasty” brand of edible oils until the next hearing, after Emami challenged a food regulator's show cause notice that said the brand name was misleading.

Justice Amit Mahajan observed that, prima facie, “no reason has been given why the petitioner's referring the term 'Healthy and Tasty' is misleading.”

The dispute began with a show cause notice dated June 5, 2026, issued by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India, which said the brand name “Emami Healthy & Tasty” was likely to mislead consumers.

Emami replied on June 23. On July 17, a letter followed, and Emami says it was issued without adjudicating that reply. Emami also says instructions have since gone to State authorities to act against its product as non-compliant with the Act.

It then moved the High Court, challenging both the notice and the letter.

Emami argued that the notice did not say how the words 'healthy' and 'tasty' mislead anyone, and that it is not the regulator's case that the product is not healthy and tasty.

The July letter, it said, gave no reason for finding otherwise. The company added that “Emami Healthy & Tasty” is a registered trademark, which in his view bars action of this nature, and that the action was arbitrary and taken at the instance of competing companies.

The Centre's counsel and counsel for the other respondents accepted notice.

The Court noted that its reading of the notice showed no reasoning on why the words are misleading, but made clear that this was only a prima facie view, and allowed the respondents to file a reply before the next hearing.

The Court directed the respondents “not to take any precipitative action” pursuant to the June notice and the July letter until the next date of hearing.

The matter will be heard on February 15, 2027.

For Emami Agrotech: Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi with Advocates Smarika Singh, Saifur Rahman Faridi, Jasneet Jolly, Ridhima Bhardwaj, Krisna Gambhir, Shreya Sethi and Ritwik Sharma

For Respondents: CGSC Rupali Bandopadhya with GP Mr. Vanshul Pali and Advocates Nidhi Adarsh and Amit Peswani for UOI; Advocates Rakesh Chaudhary, Suransh Chaudhary, Jay Sharma, Gulshan Sharma and Saumya Singh for R2 to 4.

Tags:    
Case Title :  Emami Agrotech Limited v. Union of India & Ors.Case Number :  W.P.(C) 15491/2026CITATION :  2026 LLBi HC (DEL) 1132