- Home
- News
- Articles+
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
- News
- Articles
- Aerospace
- Agriculture
- Alternate Dispute Resolution
- Banking and Finance
- Bankruptcy
- Book Review
- Bribery & Corruption
- Commercial Litigation
- Competition Law
- Conference Reports
- Consumer Products
- Contract
- Corporate Governance
- Corporate Law
- Covid-19
- Cryptocurrency
- Cybersecurity
- Data Protection
- Defence
- Digital Economy
- E-commerce
- Employment Law
- Energy and Natural Resources
- Entertainment and Sports Law
- Environmental Law
- FDI
- Food and Beverage
- Health Care
- IBC Diaries
- Insurance Law
- Intellectual Property
- International Law
- Know the Law
- Labour Laws
- Litigation
- Litigation Funding
- Manufacturing
- Mergers & Acquisitions
- NFTs
- Privacy
- Private Equity
- Project Finance
- Real Estate
- Risk and Compliance
- Technology Media and Telecom
- Tributes
- Zoom In
- Take On Board
- In Focus
- Law & Policy and Regulation
- IP & Tech Era
- Viewpoint
- Arbitration & Mediation
- Tax
- Student Corner
- AI
- ESG
- Gaming
- Inclusion & Diversity
- Law Firms
- In-House
- Rankings
- E-Magazine
- Legal Era TV
- Events
Delhi High Court restrains sale of ‘Good Time’ after Britannia alleges similarity to ‘Good Day’ Cookies
Delhi High Court restrains sale of ‘Good Time’ after Britannia alleges similarity to ‘Good Day’ Cookies
Notes that the defendants had made a fully thought-out and deliberate attempt to copy and imitate the packaging
The Delhi High Court has restrained Amar Biscuits Pvt Ltd from manufacturing and selling butter cookies under the name ‘Good Time’ on finding that it had almost identical packaging to ‘Good Day' or 'Good Day Butter Cookies’ of Britannia Industries Limited.
The bench of Justice Prathiba M Singh passed the interim order noting that butter cookies were products purchased by children, literate, and illiterate people across urban and rural areas. Moreover, Britannia’s ‘Good Day’ cookies and their packaging had enormous recognition and goodwill in the market.
Therefore, any attempt to imitate Britannia's name, mark, or packaging would have to be stopped immediately since consumers were likely to get confused between ‘Good Day’ and ‘Good Time’ cookies.
The bench ordered, “Till the next date of hearing, the defendants and all others acting for or on their behalf shall stand restrained from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale butter cookie biscuits, or any other products in the infringing packaging under the name ‘Good Time/Good Time Butter Cookies’ or any other mark identical or deceptively like the plaintiff’s mark ‘Good Day/Good Day Butter Cookies’. The defendants shall take down any online listings of this product within 48 hours.”
Britannia had approached the high court seeking an order against Amar Biscuits and its promoters from manufacturing, selling, and offering for sale butter cookies under the mark ‘Good Time’ which has similar packaging to its ‘Good Day’ brand.
It argued that the packaging of ‘Good Day Butter Cookies’ was not merely a trademark label entitled to protection but was also an artistic work in which Britannia enjoyed copyright.
The company informed the court that it had recently learned from a consumer, who put a post on platform X (formerly Twitter), about the defendants’ (Amar Biscuits) adoption of the infringing trademark ‘Good Time’. The product even used the same color combination (blue and yellow) that Britannia used.
While observing both products, the judge noted that the defendants had made a fully thought-out and deliberate attempt to copy and imitate Britannia’s packaging. If an ad interim injunction was not granted, it would cause irreparable loss to Britannia.
Justice Singh passed an interim order against Amar Biscuits and ordered it to place on record a stock statement of the material bearing the mark and packaging on the next date of hearing.
Advocates Sagar Chandra, Shubhie Wahi, and Ankita Seth appeared for Britannia Industries Limited.
Advocate Amit Tomar represented Amar Biscuit Pvt Ltd.