Calcutta High Court Says KMP Coconut Oil Packaging Looks Too Similar to Shalimar, Upholds Injunction
Ayushi Shukla
5 Dec 2025 7:59 PM IST
The Calcutta High Court has upheld an interim injunction in favour of Shalimar Chemical Works Pvt. Ltd. that restrains Edible Products (India) Ltd., which sells coconut oil under the “KMP” brand, from using packaging the court found deceptively similar to Shalimar's long used trade dress.
A division bench of Justice Sabyasachi Bhattacharyya and Justice Supratim Bhattacharya in an order dated December 3, dismissed Edible Products' appeal. The court said that in a passing-off case the overall impression of rival products must be judged from the perspective of an average, uninformed consumer.
It noted that the coconut-tree imagery, the style of representation, the bottle shape, the colour scheme and the wording on the disputed packaging could reasonably make consumers believe the two brands are associated.
Edible Products argued that Shalimar had not satisfied the three elements of passing off, namely goodwill, misrepresentation and damage. It said that yellow-green bottles were widely used in the edible oil market, that its “KMP Ayurvedic” brown label was different from Shalimar's red label and that using coconut imagery was inevitable for a coconut oil product.
Shalimar responded that it had used its yellow-green bottle with coconut-tree imagery since 2006 and that its brand “Shalimar” had enjoyed goodwill since 1945. It said Edible Products entered the market only in 2017 and had not explained why it adopted a trade dress that was nearly identical. Shalimar also relied on advertisements and invoices to show long and consistent use of its packaging.
After reviewing both products, the court said that the similarity in bottle shape, colour combination, label elements and coconut-tree depiction was likely to mislead a consumer with imperfect recollection. It rejected Edible Products' emphasis on label differences, observing that brown and red were not easily distinguishable against the yellow-green background and that trade dress must be assessed as a whole rather than through a side-by-side comparison.
On Edible Products' claim that the use of the word “KMP” was enough to differentiate it from “Shalimar Coconut Oil”, the court said,
“In the present case, the defendant/appellant argues that by mere user of the word “KMP”, as opposed to “Shalimar Coconut Oil”, a distinction has been drawn in the eye of the common person between the two products. However, a bare look at the entire packaging shows that the impression which is given to a common person having average recall is that there is striking resemblance and sufficient scope of confusing between the two,” the court said.
The bench held that Shalimar had demonstrated goodwill in its packaging, that Edible Products' adoption of a similar trade dress amounted to prima facie misrepresentation and that the likelihood of damage was evident.
It noted that, “since the cumulative appearance of the defendant's packaging remarkably resembles that of the plaintiff, particularly if seen at some interval between each other by a person of average intelligence and recall, the resultant damage to the plaintiff's goodwill is a given.”
The court therefore dismissed the appeal and upheld the injunction in favour of Shalimar Coconut Oil. It clarified that its observations were prima facie and would not affect the final decision in the suit.
Case Title: Edible Products (India) Limited v. Shalimar Chemical Works Private Limited
Case Number: FMAT No. 189 of 2024
For the Appellant: Senior Advocate Rudraman Bhattacharya with Advocates Suvasish Sengupta, Arunuima Lala, Arindam Chandra, Atish Ghosh, Antara Dey, Neha Gupta
For the Respondent: Senior Advocates Ranjan Bachawat, Abhrajit Mitra, with Advocates Soumya Ray Chowdhury, Debayan Mondal, Subhankar Nag, Sanket Sarawagi, Sanjiv Kumar Trivedi, Iram Hassan, Mahima Cholera, Himanshu Bhawsinghka, Susrea Mitra, Sagnik Bose.