Another trademark dispute has made headlines in India, this time from the liquor industry. The KASHMYR Vodka Trademark Case highlights how companies are increasingly vigilant about protecting their intellectual property rights (IPR), where even a single word or phrase can carry immense brand value. At the center of this dispute are two major players — Piccadily Agro Industries and Radico Khaitan Ltd. The case was filed by Piccadily against Radico, alleging infringement over the use of a vodka brand name. If you want to understand the details about this trademark case and the implications of this case, keep reading.
Why Did Piccadily Agro Take Radico Khaitan to Court Over the “KASHMYR” Vodka Brand
To understand this case better, we first need to look at its background. The KASHMYR Vodka Trademark Case began in July 2025, when Radico Khaitan, one of India’s biggest liquor companies, launched its vodka brand “KASHMYR.” This move quickly sparked controversy because Piccadily Agro Industries, another major liquor player, already held trademarks for the words “Cashmere” (registered in 2015) and “Cashmir” (launched in May 2025). Piccadily argued that Radico’s new brand name looked and sounded far too similar to its own, especially since both vodkas were positioned in the same premium segment. They claimed this similarity could easily confuse customers and damage the reputation they had worked hard to build. After this, they did not hold back and filed the case against Radico Khaitan.
Why the Court Sided with Piccadily In The KASHMYR Vodka Trademark Case
The case first reached the Karnal District Court in September 2025, and after hearing multiple arguments from both sides, the judge ruled in favor of Piccadily Agro by giving a temporary injunction order. The court gave multiple reasons, such as:
- The court observed that “KASHMYR” looked and sounded too similar to Piccadily’s registered trademarks “Cashmir” and “Cashmere.”
- Since both vodkas were categorized in the same category, there was a high chance that customers could get confused or assume a connection between the two brands.
- The judge also noted that continued use of “KASHMYR” could damage Piccadily’s hard-earned reputation and cause harm that money alone couldn’t fix.
- To prevent this, the court ordered Radico Khaitan to stop using the “KASHMYR” name until the case reaches a final decision.
How Does the Piccadily vs Radico Khaitan Case Highlight The Importance Of IPR?
From an IPR perspective, the Piccadily vs. Radico Khaitan trademark infringement case shows the critical role of trademark protection in safeguarding brand identity. Piccadily had already secured rights over “Cashmere” and “Cashmir,” giving it ownership in the liquor market. When Radico launched “KASHMYR,” the court viewed it as a case of deceptive similarity — where even small changes in spelling or sound can infringe on an existing mark if they confuse consumers. The above order, the court maintained the principle that IPR exists to prevent unfair competition and protect businesses from dilution of their brand equity. That’s why it is always recommended to the business if there is something that identifies your brand, make it trademarked, and that will help you the legal cases as well.
Conclusion
The Piccadily vs Radico Khaitan cases show how even a slight change in branding can create major legal battles when intellectual property rights are involved. By granting an injunction, the court reinforced that trademarks are more than just names—they protect reputation, trust, and fair competition in the market. There were multiple things in this case to understand, and in this article, we tried to explain each thing in simple terms.