Two beverage giants—Parle Agro and PepsiCo India—are facing off over the use of the word “Fizz” on 7Up packaging. Parle Agro vs PepsiCo trademark dispute started when Pepsico India started using the phrase “Fizz” prominently on 7Up bottles, a term Parle claims has been closely tied to its brand identity since the launch of Appy Fizz in 2005. This case is a perfect reminder that even a simple four-letter word can create major challenges for global companies. It highlights how trademarks and intellectual property rights (IPR) are not just legal formalities but critical concerns that every business must safeguard.
What is the background of this Trademark Case Between Parle Agro and PepsiCo?
The roots of this dispute go back to June 2025, when Parle Agro noticed a change in the way PepsiCo India was presenting its lemon-based soft drink, 7Up. At first, PepsiCo displayed the phrase “Extra Fizz” only as a description, positioned next to a bold and clearly visible 7Up logo. However, over time, the design shifted—the word “Fizz” began to take center stage, while the 7Up branding was reduced in size and visibility. Parle argued that this change blurred the distinction between 7Up and its own product Appy Fizz, which has carried the “Fizz” identity since 2005 and today holds a dominant position in India’s sparkling fruit drink segment.
Parle Agro emphasized that Appy Fizz is not just a brand but a category leader, with the company claiming a significant share of India’s fruit-based fizzy drink market. Over the years, “Fizz” has become synonymous with its product line, backed by heavy advertising campaigns, celebrity endorsements, and strong consumer recognition. According to industry reports, Appy Fizz alone contributes a large portion of Parle Agro’s ₹8,000+ crore beverage business, making the protection of its “Fizz” identity a high-stakes matter.
What Parle Agro Demanded in the ‘Fizz’ Trademark Fight Against PepsiCo
After noticing the issue, Parle Agro went ahead and filed a trademark infringement case against PepsiCo India on August 13, 2025. In its petition, Parle alleged that PepsiCo was wrongfully using the word “Fizz” on 7Up bottles—a word Parle has associated with its popular drink Appy Fizz since 2005. The company pointed out that PepsiCo had initially used the phrase “Extra Fizz” in a purely descriptive way, but later gave “Fizz” greater prominence while making the 7Up logo smaller. According to Parle, this made the packaging look deceptively similar to Appy Fizz, risking confusion among buyers and weakening its brand. Parle Agro’s main demand in the Delhi High Court was that PepsiCo India should be restrained from using the word “Fizz” on 7Up packaging and promotions. The court should issue an injunction (a legal order) stopping PepsiCo from continuing this practice.
Read Also: Relief for Thalapathy Vijay: Madras HC Refuses Ban on TVK Party Flag in Trademark Dispute
Delhi HC Proceedings in this Trademark Dispute
The matter has been scheduled for its next hearing on September 4, 2025. This isn’t the first time Parle Agro has had to protect its brand. Back in 2020, the Bombay High Court ruled in Parle’s favor in a dispute with Walmart’s “Fizzy Apple,” saying the packaging looked too similar to Appy Fizz, even though the word “fizz” itself was seen as descriptive. Now, the Delhi High Court must decide if Parle’s long use of the word “Fizz” and its unique packaging make it worthy of protection.
IPR Analysis of the Parle Agro vs PepsiCo ‘Fizz’ Trademark Battle
From an intellectual property perspective, the Parle Agro vs PepsiCo trademark dispute centers on whether a descriptive term like “Fizz” can qualify for trademark protection. In India, generic words normally cannot be monopolized, but they can gain protection if a company proves the word has acquired a secondary meaning—a strong consumer association with its brand. Parle Agro argues that since launching Appy Fizz in 2005, it has built such recognition through continuous use, advertising, and market dominance, making “Fizz” part of its unique identity.
PepsiCo, however, maintains that “Fizz” is a common industry term for carbonation and should remain available for all beverage makers. The Delhi High Court’s decision will test how far Indian trademark law protects brand distinctiveness while preventing overreach on everyday words. For businesses, the case is a reminder that IPR is not just paperwork—it is a shield of brand value, and even a simple word can spark a battle with global implications.
Conclusion
The outcome of this case will play a key role in shaping how far companies can go in protecting words that may seem ordinary but carry strong brand value. For Parle Agro, it is about safeguarding nearly two decades of identity built around “Fizz,” while for PepsiCo, it is about defending its right to use a common term for a fizzy drink. As the next hearing approaches, all eyes are on the Delhi High Court to decide whether “Fizz” is just a generic word for bubbles—or a brand powerful enough to stop a global rival in its tracks.
Read Also: VinFast Minio Green EV Patented in India: Design, Tech, Battery & Market Scope