Punjab and Haryana High Court Stays Trial Court's Injunction in Trademark Dispute Between Liquor Giants

Appellate Court Highlights Multiple Triable Issues in Trademark Conflict Over 'Cashmere' and 'Kashmyr'

In a significant development in the commercial trademark dispute between two major players in the liquor industry, Radico Khaitan Ltd. and Picadilly Agro Industries Ltd., the Punjab and Haryana High Court has temporarily stayed the injunction order passed by the trial court against Radico Khaitan Ltd. The dispute centers around the use of the trademarks 'Cashmere' and 'Kashmyr', with Picadilly Agro Industries alleging that Radico Khaitan's use of 'Kashmyr' is deceptively similar to their registered trademark 'Cashmere'.

The legal tussle began when Picadilly Agro Industries, a company with a significant presence in the production and distribution of malt spirits, filed a suit claiming that Radico Khaitan's use of the mark 'Kashmyr' for their vodka product was likely to cause confusion among consumers. Picadilly, which owns the registered trademark 'Cashmere', launched its vodka under the brand 'Cashmir' earlier this year and claims to have developed the product from a rare wheat variety cultivated since 2019.

The trial court had initially granted an injunction restraining Radico Khaitan from using the 'Kashmyr' trademark, citing potential consumer confusion and Picadilly's prior trademark registration. However, Radico Khaitan challenged the injunction, arguing that the trial court failed to consider crucial aspects such as territorial jurisdiction and prior use. They contended that their product, 'The Spirit of KASHMYR', had been launched earlier, and that no part of the cause of action arose within the jurisdiction of the trial court, as they neither manufacture nor sell their products in Haryana.

The appellate court, while hearing the appeal, identified several triable issues, including the territorial jurisdiction of the trial court, the distinction between the trademarks in question, and the validity of the injunction based on Picadilly's alleged prior use of the mark. The High Court noted that the trial court's order did not adequately address these issues and decided to stay the injunction until a final decision is made.

The High Court has directed Radico Khaitan to maintain a separate statement of accounts for the manufacture and sale of the product under the disputed trademark and submit it to the trial court fortnightly. This measure is intended to ensure that any potential damages can be assessed accurately at the time of the final decision.

The case has been adjourned to November 13, 2025, with Picadilly Agro Industries being granted four weeks to file a reply, and Radico Khaitan given ten days thereafter to submit a rejoinder. Until then, the operation of the trial court's order remains suspended, providing a temporary respite to Radico Khaitan.

This case highlights the complexities involved in trademark disputes, especially in industries where brand identity is a crucial component of market strategy. The outcome of this appeal could have significant implications for both companies, influencing their market positions and branding strategies.

Bottom Line:

Commercial Trade Mark Dispute - Injunction granted by trial court against the use of a similar trademark deemed questionable - appellate court considers territorial jurisdiction, prior use, and distinction in branding while staying the operation of the trial court's order temporarily.

Statutory provision(s): Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order 39 Rules 1 and 2

Radico Khaitan Ltd. v. Picadilly Agro Industries Ltd., (Punjab and Haryana)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2806093