Urban Company Sues Kent RO Over Ads Calling Its Water Purifiers ‘Unsafe, Risky’

Urban Company has taken Kent RO Systems to the Delhi High Court over an advertising campaign that it alleged made false and misleading claims about its Native range of water purifiers, the company said in a regulatory filing on Sunday, August 23.

The dispute centres on Urban Company’s Native M0, M1, M2, M1 Pro and M2 Pro water purifiers, which offer a 2-year filter life and 2-year service life, the company said.

According to Urban Company, Kent RO had run advertisements and social media promotions through several influencers that questioned the safety and utility of the Native purifiers.

The company alleged that the campaign described the 2-year filter life and service life feature as a “marketing gimmick” and claimed that using Native water purifiers was “unsafe” and “risky” for consumers.

Urban Company filed the defamation and disparagement suit against Kent RO on August 11, 2026. The matter was heard at length by the Delhi High Court on August 12, the company said.

According to Urban Company's filing, Kent RO, following the hearing, told the court that it would remove the advertisements that were the subject of the lawsuit and would not publish or promote similar claims against Urban Company concerning water purifiers offering a 2-year filter life or 2-year no-servicing feature.

Ads To Be Removed Within 15 Days

The Delhi High Court directed that the advertisements and social media content covered by the proceedings be taken down within 15 days from August 12, Urban Company said.

While the court passed its order on the date of the hearing, the order was uploaded on the court’s website on August 22.

The company said the latest development is limited to the advertising-related dispute and does not resolve other legal proceedings between the two companies.

These include a patent infringement case filed by Kent RO, along with a counterclaim by Urban Company concerning Kent RO’s patent.

Urban Company has also filed a separate suit alleging tortious interference against Kent RO. Both matters remain sub-judice, according to the company's regulatory filing.