The Punjab and Haryana High Court has stayed the operation of an injunction order passed by the Commercial Court, Karnal, which had barred Radico Khaitan Ltd. from using the mark “Kashmyr” for its liquor products. The injunction was issued in a trademark infringement suit filed by Picadilly Agro Industries Ltd., the proprietor of the marks “Cashmir” and “Cashmere.”

 

A Division Bench of Justice Ashwani Kumar Mishra and Justice Rohit Kapoor granted interim relief to Radico Khaitan on October 9, 2025, while hearing its first appeal against the injunction.

 

Picadilly Agro, which manufactures IMFL and malt-based spirits, asserted that it adopted the mark “Cashmere” in 2015 for a premium vodka brand and subsequently sought registration for “Cashmir.” The company stated that it launched vodka under the name “Cashmir” in May 2025, claiming distinctiveness arising from the use of a proprietary wheat variety in the distillation process.

 

Picadilly alleged that Radico Khaitan applied for label approval of “Kashmyr” before the Uttar Pradesh Excise authorities and launched its vodka variant in July 2025, resulting in phonetic similarity and a likelihood of consumer confusion. The Commercial Court had accepted this argument and restrained Radico Khaitan from manufacturing or selling products under the disputed label.

 

Radico Khaitan appealed, arguing primarily that territorial jurisdiction was wrongly assumed by the Karnal court since it neither produces nor markets the product in Haryana and holds no excise licence in the state. The company further argued that Picadilly’s “Cashmir” mark was still under the registration process and could not be treated as a registered trademark for enforcement.

 

The High Court found that multiple substantial issues required adjudication, including:

• Whether any part of the cause of action arose within Haryana.

• Whether the two marks and their trade dress were deceptively similar.

• Whether Picadilly could establish prior use.

• Whether a less restrictive interim measure could have safeguarded Picadilly’s claimed interest.

 

Pending final consideration, the Bench ordered that the injunction shall remain in abeyance.

 

The appeal is next listed for November 13, 2025.