Delhi High Court Finds 'Huge Counterfeiting Operation', Awards ₹2.5 Lakh Damages To HUL, P&G

The Delhi High Court has recently decreed a trademark infringement suit in favour of Hindustan Lever Ltd. (now HUL) and another plaintiff, a subsidiary of Procter & Gamble Company, USA, awarding Rs 2,50,000 in damages against individuals found to be engaged in counterfeiting fast-moving consumer goods.

In a judgment delivered on February 28, 2026, Justice Tejas Karia held that the defendants were running a “huge counterfeiting operation” involving fake shampoos, creams, detergents and other FMCG products sold under the plaintiffs' well-known marks.

After examining the evidence, the court concluded, "the Defendants have clearly committed infringement of the Plaintiffs' Marks and the Plaintiff's Artistic Work in the product packaging of items corresponding to the Plaintiffs' Marks. These issues are decided in favour of the Plaintiffs and against the Defendants."

The suit was filed against Rakesh Goyal and other defendants who were described as his immediate family members and were alleged to be engaged in the manufacture, filling, packaging, and sale of counterfeit products under established brands. The court recorded that the defendants had been subjected to multiple police raids in 2002 and 2003, during which large quantities of counterfeit goods were seized from their premises.

The court noted that “the exact data of sales of the Defendants is not available,” but observed that the search and seizure memos indicated the scale of the operation, warranting a broad assessment of damages. It held that the plaintiffs had suffered loss on account of the counterfeiting activities.

The plaintiffs had sought a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from dealing in counterfeit goods bearing marks such as Sunsilk, Clinic Plus, Lakme, Pond's, Ariel and Head & Shoulders. They told the court that they are market leaders in the FMCG sector, with extensive manufacturing operations and a wide distribution network across India. They also stated that their product packaging, including its distinctive artwork and design, qualifies as original artistic works protected under the Copyright Act.

Although the defendants initially filed a written statement denying the allegations, they later stopped appearing in the proceedings. They did not lead any evidence or cross-examine the plaintiffs' witnesses.

In these circumstances, the court held that the allegations of trademark infringement, copyright infringement and passing off stood proved.

Decreeing the suit, the court directed Rakesh Goyal and two other family members arrayed as defendants to jointly and severally pay Rs 2,50,000 to the plaintiffs within four weeks. It further ordered that if the amount is not paid within that period, it shall carry interest at 9% per annum from the expiry of four weeks until actual payment.

The court also held the plaintiffs entitled to recover actual litigation costs, noting the huge quantity of infringing goods recovered, the continuation of infringing activities despite multiple police raids, and the defendants' non-appearance during the later stages of the trial.