The Calcutta High Court on Friday lifted the ad-interim injunction that had restrained Godrej Consumer Products Ltd from selling its “Spic” toilet cleaner in the impugned packaging.
The dispute arose from a suit filed by Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited, manufacturer of Harpic. Reckitt alleged that Godrej infringed its trademark rights by using a similar toilet cleaner bottle shape.
A Division Bench of Justice Rajasekhar Mantha and Justice Md. Shabbar Rashidi allowed Godrej’s appeal. The Bench set aside the injunction granted by the single judge on February 25, 2026.
Division Bench Holds Injunction Was Premature
At the outset, the Bench held that the single judge should not have granted ad-interim relief at such an early stage.
“Having regard to the discussions made above, this Court is of the view that the grant of an ad-interim order of injunction, in the facts and circumstances of the case, was not warranted. Accordingly, the impugned order of injunction dated February 25, 2026 is set aside,” the Court observed.
The Bench stressed that courts must exercise caution before issuing prohibitory orders without hearing the other side.
Background of the Dispute
Reckitt claimed trademark rights over its registered “Harpic bottle and cap” device mark. Based on this claim, it secured an ad-interim injunction restraining Godrej from selling its product in the allegedly infringing bottle shape.
While granting relief, the single judge held that Reckitt had established a strong prima facie case. The Court observed that trademark protection can extend to the shape and structural features of a bottle.
After comparing both products, the single judge described the shapes as “virtually identical” and “strikingly similar.” Consequently, the Court concluded that the similarity could cause consumer confusion.
Appeal Court Questions Urgency
However, the Division Bench took a different view.
First, it noted that the suit primarily targeted allegedly disparaging advertisements issued by Godrej. It did not appear to be a pure trademark infringement action.
Second, the Bench observed that the advertisements had been in circulation since October 2025. Therefore, the claim of urgency lacked credibility.
Importantly, the Court emphasised that Godrej should have received an opportunity to file its response before the Court passed a prohibitory order.
Undertaking on Advertisements Considered Adequate
The Division Bench also noted that Godrej had already undertaken before the single judge to discontinue the disputed advertisements.
In the Court’s view, this undertaking provided sufficient interim protection to Reckitt. Accordingly, a sweeping injunction was unnecessary.
Court Expresses Doubts on Bottle-Shape Claim
The Bench further observed that Reckitt appeared to have introduced the trademark infringement claim at a later stage. This raised doubts about its urgency and intent.
Clarifying the legal position, the Court held that Reckitt’s registered mark must be assessed as a complete “Harpic bottle and cap” device. The bottle shape alone would not amount to infringement unless the colour scheme, branding, and overall trade dress were also substantially replicated.
Significantly, the Bench cautioned against extending trademark protection after the expiry of design protection. It described such an attempt as “wholly suspect” and warned against using trademark law to indirectly revive an expired design monopoly.
Matter Sent Back for Final Adjudication
In light of these findings, the Division Bench held that Reckitt failed to establish a strong prima facie case warranting interim relief.
The Court set aside the injunction and directed the parties to complete pleadings before the single judge. The suit will now proceed to final adjudication.
Counsel Appearances
Godrej was represented by Senior Advocates Mukul Rohatgi, R. Bachawat and R. Bhattacharya, along with S. Roychowdhury, S. Mitra, A. Chaturvedi, N. Nadkarni, D. Singh, V. Pandey, S. Mukherjee, A. Bohra and S. Khannum.
Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited was represented by Senior Advocates Sudipto Sarkar, S.N. Mookherjee and R. Banerji, along with S. Ginodia, Jawahar Lal, Nancy Roy, Shwetank Ginodia, M. Agarwal, N. Choudhury and S. Firdous.
