Delhi High Court Injuncts 'Gainda' Cleaning Products For Copying Harpic, Colin, Lizol Trade Dress

The Delhi High Court has granted an interim injunction restraining Grand Chemical Works from manufacturing and selling cleaning products under its 'Gainda' mark that deceptively resemble Reckitt's Harpic, Colin, and Lizol brands.

Passing the order on March 28, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia held that the defendant's products imitate the essential features of the plaintiffs' trade dress and are likely to mislead consumers into believing they originate from the same source.

“The overall comparison of the Defendant's Products with the Plaintiffs' Products shows that there is an attempt to imitate the essential features of the Plaintiffs' Trade Dresses by the Impugned Trade Dresses,” the Court observed.

Reckitt and Colman Overseas Hygiene Home Ltd along with its group entities filed the commercial suit against Akash Arora, who operates Grand Chemical Works, alleging infringement of trade marks and passing off. The plaintiffs contended that the defendant's 'Gainda' range of toilet cleaners, glass cleaners and disinfectants was being sold in trade dress that amounted to a slavish imitation of their products.

They argued that their products, Harpic, Colin and Lizol, have been sold in India since the late 1990s and early 2000s and are identified by distinctive trade dress elements such as bottle shapes, angled nozzles, cap designs and specific colour combinations.

Opposing the plea, the cleaning products maker contended that the plaintiffs were attempting to “evergreen” expired design registrations by claiming trade mark rights over bottle shapes and caps. It was argued that features such as angled nozzles and ergonomic grips are functional and common to the industry, and that the prominent use of the house mark 'GAINDA' along with a rhino logo eliminated any likelihood of confusion.

Rejecting these submissions at the interim stage, the Court held that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case of passing off and that their trade dress had acquired distinctiveness through long and extensive use.

“The Impugned Trade Dresses are deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs' Trade Dresses as the essential features of the Plaintiffs' Trade Dresses such as the colour of the packaging, the colour of the cap, the colour of the liquid, the shape of the bottle are copied in the Impugned Trade Dresses,” the court held.

The court noted that the defendant had not offered any bona fide explanation for adopting nearly identical features. It held that the overall get-up of the products was likely to cause confusion and that the use of the 'GAINDA' mark was insufficient to dispel such confusion.

“Based on the overall get-up of the Defendant's Products, it is evident that the same is likely to cause confusion as the dominant similarities between the Impugned Trade Dresses and the Plaintiffs' Trade Dresses overwhelm the minor differences,” the court said.

The court accordingly restrained the defendant and all those acting on its behalf from manufacturing or selling toilet cleaners, glass cleaners and disinfectants using trade dress deceptively similar to that of Harpic, Colin and Lizol