Supreme Court Extends Dabur's Deadline To Exhaust 9,020 'Cool King Thanda Tel' Cartons Till November

The Supreme Court on Friday extended by two months the deadline for Dabur India Limited to exhaust 9,020 cartons of “Cool King Thanda Tel”, in its trademark and trade-dress dispute with Emami Limited.

The deadline, originally fixed by the Delhi High Court as September 30, 2026, will now operate until November 2026, subject to the existing conditions imposed on Dabur.

A bench of Justices P.S. Narasimha and Alok Aradhe extended the permission while refusing to interfere with the Delhi High Court Division Bench's August 11, 2026 judgment concerning Dabur's existing stock.

“The order dated 19.6.2026, coupled with all the conditions mentioned therein, is extended by two months from today,” the Supreme Court ordered.

The conditions include a direction to recall any stock remaining unsold after the deadline from distributors, retailers, chemists, shopkeepers, e-commerce platforms, and other channels.

Dabur is also required not to undertake fresh manufacture of the product and to maintain accurate accounts of the existing stock and furnish weekly disclosures of sales and remaining inventory to Emami.

The issue arose from an interim injunction granted by a Delhi High Court Single Judge on January 31, 2026, restraining Dabur from selling “Cool King Thanda Tel” under the impugned trade dress or any deceptively similar trade dress.

Dabur challenged the injunction before the Delhi High Court Division Bench. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal and upheld the injunction on May 22, holding that the overall visual appearance of Dabur's product, including its layout and colour scheme, was deceptively similar to Emami's product and likely to mislead consumers.

Four days later, on May 26, Dabur approached the Delhi High Court Single Judge seeking permission to exhaust its existing stock.

On June 19, the Single Judge permitted Dabur to exhaust stock manufactured up to January 31, 2026, until September 30. The permission was subject to conditions, including the requirement to recall any stock remaining unsold after that date.

Emami challenged the June 19 order before the Delhi High Court Division Bench.

The Division Bench held that the Single Judge could not have entertained Dabur's application after the injunction had been upheld in appeal. It held that the Single Judge's January 31 judgment had merged into the Division Bench's May 22 judgment.

According to the Division Bench, any clarification, variation or relaxation of the injunction therefore had to be sought before the Division Bench or a superior court.

However, the Division Bench did not take away Dabur's permission to exhaust the existing stock. Instead, it held that the conditional permission granted by the Single Judge would be “deemed to have been granted by this Court” and allowed Dabur to dispose of the 9,020 cartons in accordance with the conditions imposed in the June 19 order.

The Division Bench also rejected Dabur's request to modify the condition requiring recall of unsold stock after September 30. It held that allowing such stock to remain available in the market would undermine the injunction.

Appearing for Dabur before the Supreme Court, Senior Advocate S. Niranjan Reddy submitted that the company had approached the Single Judge after the injunction seeking time to exhaust its existing stock.

“We go back before the Single Judge saying that since injunction is granted, time may be given to us to exhaust the stocks. The learned Single Judge gives us time till 30th September.”

Reddy submitted that the requirement to recall unsold products after September 30 created difficulties because some products may have already moved beyond Dabur's direct control.

“If the distributors have entered into further arrangements with stockists, it's a little difficult.”

He submitted that Dabur was willing to recall products that remained within its control.

“I'll recall whatever I can. What is beyond my control, I cannot.”

Appearing for Emami, Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari opposed an indefinite extension and stressed the importance of the recall condition.

“The problem is the imitation of the offending bottle.”

He submitted that retailers could continue displaying the bottles even after the product itself was no longer being sold.

“They give it to the retailers and tell them, you keep it on your showcase, although you don't have this product anymore, but to confuse, keep it on your showcase.”

The Court also emphasised the purpose of the recall condition.

“That's why it's important that those shops remove those bottles because you are actually passing off my trademark and my trade dress.”

The bench noted that Dabur had already been given substantial time to exhaust the stock.

“He already got time till September, from January. You already got time in September... eight months, you already got. Now he needs to recall.”

The Supreme Court consequently extended the September 30 deadline by two months, while leaving the other conditions governing the disposal of the stock intact.

The dispute stems from Emami's trademark suit alleging that Dabur's “Cool King Thanda Tel” used a trade dress deceptively similar to Emami's product.

The Delhi High Court Single Judge granted the interim injunction on January 31, restraining Dabur from selling the product under the impugned trade dress or any deceptively similar trade dress. The Division Bench upheld that injunction on May 22.

The Division Bench subsequently held that the Single Judge could not have granted the June 19 permission after the injunction had merged into the Division Bench judgment. It nevertheless preserved the permission by treating it as having been granted by the Division Bench itself.