Delhi HC Upholds Temporary Injunction Against Dabur's Cool King Thanda Tael In Dispute With Emami

A Division Bench of Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora made the ruling observing, "Our aforesaid conclusion is based on the finding that the trade dress encompassing the overall visual appearance of the product including the lay-out, colour scheme of the products of the appellant vis-à-vis those of the respondent, has been rightly injuncted because it is deceptively similar to the trade dress of the products of the respondent /plaintiff and there is every likelihood of misleading the consumers and constitutes passing off."

The order under challenge was passed by Justice Tejas Karia on January 31, 2026. The Single Bench had found that Dabur's packaging was deceptively similar to Emami's Navratna Oil, which has been sold in a distinctive red trade dress since 1989.

The single judge had held that the overall get-up of Dabur's product, including the red packaging, bottle shape, colour of the liquid, placement of hibiscus flowers, ice cubes and ayurvedic herbs, and even the use of the Hindi words 'Raahat', 'Aaraam' and 'Tarotaazgi' in the same order as on Navratna's sachet, was not coincidental.

Justice Karia had also noted that Dabur's own launch advertisement had visibly displayed Navratna's bottle while positioning Cool King as a shelf replacement, which the single bench found to be an admission of Emami's goodwill and an intent to free-ride on it.

Dabur had challenged the injunction before the Division Bench of the High Court.

Before the single judge, Dabur had argued that its prominent house mark 'DABUR' was prominently displayed on the product and was sufficient to dispel any confusion.

It had also been argued that the colour red is functional in a cooling oil product, being a natural consequence of the ingredients, and cannot be monopolised. Dabur further contended that elements such as hibiscus, ice blocks, menthol leaves and words like 'thanda' and 'cool' are generic and common to the trade.

The single bench rejected these contentions. It held that sticking a house mark on packaging that is otherwise deceptively similar does not cure a passing off.

The single bench further held that while Emami claimed no monopoly over red colour or herbs individually, it was the distinctive combination and ensemble of features that had acquired secondary meaning over three decades.

The Division Bench on Friday, however, dismissed Dabur's appeal against the temperory bar.

For Dabur: Senior Advocate Sandeep Sethi with Advocates Kripa Pandit, Prabhu Tandon, Christopher Thomas, Krisna Gambhir and Shreya Sethi

For Emami: Senior Advocate Abhimanyu Bhandari with Advocates Roohe Hina Dua, Harshit Khanduja, Shrutika Gargand and Piyush Jain