Delhi High Court Temporarily Bars Sale Of Products Using 'Happi Planet' Mark And Similar Packaging

By an order dated January 28, 2026, a Single Judge Bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela held that Happi Planet had made out a strong prima facie  warranting interim protection.

Finding the rival products to be deceptively similar, the Court observed that, “Having compared the products, this Court is of the opinion that not only do the infringing products contain the trademark “Happi Planet” of the plaintiff but also are packaged in near identical or deceptively similar packaging and trade dress. The artistic work, the trade dress and packaging is so identical that it took a while for this Court to distinguish between the two. The Court is of the opinion that the plaintiff has a prima facie strong case.”

The suit was filed by Happi Planet Eco Products Private Limited, which alleged that several sellers were manufacturing and offering for sale products using the identical “Happi Planet” mark along with packaging and overall presentation closely resembling its own.

The company stated that it has been using the “Happi Planet” mark since November 2021 and has filed multiple trademark applications across classes, in addition to securing copyrights over its packaging, artistic works and trade dress.

According to the company, it operates in the eco-friendly home care segment and has built a substantial market presence through online and offline channels. It further pointed to significant investments in marketing and brand building, as well as venture capital funding, to demonstrate the goodwill associated with the brand.

After examining the material on record and comparing the competing products, the Court noted that the impugned use of the “Happi Planet” mark, packaging and visual elements was near-identical or deceptively similar. 

Holding that the balance of convenience lay in favour of Happi Planet, the Court observed that the continued sale of such products was likely to cause irreparable harm to the company's goodwill, reputation and consumer trust, which could not be adequately compensated through monetary terms.

Accordingly, the Court restrained the identified sellers and all persons acting on their behalf from using the “Happi Planet” trademark or any deceptively similar variant, as well as from reproducing company's packaging, trade dress and copyrighted artistic works.

The Court also directed e-commerce platforms including Amazon, Flipkart, Meesho and JioMart to take down the infringing listings and block or suspend sellers found to be using the identical mark and packaging.

In addition, the Court passed a dynamic injunction permitting Happi Planet to directly notify the platforms of any further infringing listings, which are required to be removed without the need for separate court orders. 

For Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Chander M. Lall with Advocates Subhash Bhutoria, Anuja Negi, Annanya Mehan and Tushar Gulati

For Defendants: Advocate Deepak Singh for D-1; Advocate Manas Raghuvanshi for D-8; Advocates Saikrishna Rajagopal, Vivek Ayyagari and Abhay Aren for Meesho/D-10; Advocates Jayant Malik and Nishant Shokeen for D-11; CGSC Nidhi Raman with Advocates Om Ram and Arnav Mittal for CCPA(UOI)/D-12; SPC Sumit Nagpal with G.P. Sarthak Rana for D-13.