Vakil Help Desk News: a Delhi commercial court has dismissed the maker of 'India Gate' rice's trade-dress suit against a rival pack, holding that a shared colour and logo placement do not, by themselves, make the packaging deceptively similar.
Vakil Help Desk News, IPR. Owning a strong brand does not mean every rival with a broadly similar pack is infringing — the marks and overall impression must actually be deceptively similar. A Delhi commercial court made this clear in KRBL Limited v. Rakshit Trading Company & Ors., before District Judge (Commercial) Sh. Rajesh Kumar Goel, dismissing the suit.
The dispute
KRBL, which owns the "INDIA GATE" rice mark and its label and trade dress, alleged that a rival's "MUGHAL KHWAISH" rice packaging infringed its rights. The defendants did not appear and were proceeded ex parte.
What the Court held
- Even without a contest, the Court independently assessed deceptive similarity and found none.
- The rival's dominant trade name 'MUGHAL KHWAISH', in a different font and size, had no relation to 'INDIA GATE'.
- A shared white colour, similar logo placement and logo size do not create a monopoly or establish deceptive similarity.
- There was no likelihood of confusion for an average consumer, and the suit was dismissed.
Why it matters
Trade-dress protection has limits. Common, non-distinctive features — a background colour or the usual placement of a logo — are not monopolised. The test remains the overall impression on an ordinary buyer, and a court will apply it even when the other side is absent.
What this means for you
Brand owners: build your trade-dress case on genuinely distinctive features, not on common elements like a background colour or ordinary logo placement — a weak case can be dismissed even against an absent defendant. If you are accused of copying a pack, a clearly different brand name and get-up is a strong defence. We assess the real strength of trade-dress claims before you sue or when you are sued.