Delhi High Court Temporarily Bars Dabur's Cool King Thanda Tael Over Navratna-Like Trade Dress

A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Tejas Karia, in an order dated January 31, 2026, allowed Emami's application for interim injunction in a passing off action against Dabur India. The Court held that Dabur's impugned packaging closely imitates the essential and distinctive features of Emami's packaging and is likely to cause consumer confusion.

On examining the competing products, the court observed, “The Impugned Trade Dress is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's Trade Dress as the essential features of the Plaintiff's Trade Dress such as colour of the packaging, colour of the cap, colour of the liquid, shape of the bottle and the use of combination of red, white, yellow and gold with the essential features of ice cubes, hibiscus flowers, ayurvedic herbs are copied in the Impugned Trade Dress along with the use of the words 'Raahat', 'Aaraam' and 'Tarotaazgi' in the same order.”

Emami, part of the Emami Group, is engaged in the manufacture and sale of personal care and ayurvedic products and has been marketing Navratna Oil since 1989. The company asserted that the product enjoys significant goodwill and market leadership in the therapeutic cooling oil segment.

According to Emami, Navratna is sold in a distinctive red trade dress featuring specific visual elements, including a particular bottle shape, red packaging and images of hibiscus flowers, ice cubes and ayurvedic herbs. Emami alleged that Dabur's Cool King Thanda Tael, launched in 2023, copied these elements in a manner amounting to deliberate imitation.

Opposing the injunction plea, Dabur argued that the colour red, the use of flowers, ice imagery and words such as “thanda” and “cool” are common to trade and descriptive in nature. It further asserted that the prominent use of its house mark “Dabur” was sufficient to distinguish its product and negate any likelihood of confusion.

After examining the rival trade dresses as a whole, the Court held that Dabur had attempted to imitate the essential features of Emami's trade dress.

The Court noted, “The overall comparison of the get-up at the point of sale creates an impression that the Impugned Trade Dress is an imitation of the essential features of the Plaintiff's Trade Dress. It is not necessary to have exact identity for side-by-side comparison between the Impugned Trade Dress and the Plaintiff's Trade Dress. It is sufficient if there is an overall similarity in the idea or impression assessed from the perspective of a consumer of average intelligence having imperfect recollection”

While observing that Emami cannot claim exclusivity over individual elements such as the colour red or descriptive words when viewed in isolation, the Court held that the distinctive combination and arrangement of these elements had acquired secondary meaning in Emami's favour through long and extensive use.

“Even though the individual components of the Plaintiff's Trade Dress are common to the trade, the overall get-up of the Plaintiff's Trade Dress requires protection,” the Court said.

Finding that Emami had prima facie established goodwill, misrepresentation and a likelihood of damage, the Court restrained Dabur from selling “Cool King Thanda Tael” using the impugned trade dress or any other trade dress deceptively similar to Emami's Navratna packaging.

For Plaintiff: Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari with Advocates Roohe Hina Dua, Harshit Khanduja & Vinayak Thakur

For Defendant: Senior Advocates Sandeep Sethi & Anirudh Bakhru with Advocates Kripa Pandit, Christopher Thomas & Pranjali Arya