Introduction

In the competitive world of consumer goods, where brand reputation hinges on public perception, protecting intellectual property is paramount for business sustainability. Trademarks form a central part of this puzzle, allowing companies to differentiate their products in the marketplace and protect their hard-earned goodwill from trademark infringements. The recent case of “Himalaya Wellness Company & Ors. v. Greenland Trading Company CS(COMM)1266/2025,” adjudicated by the High Court of Delhi, exemplifies the ongoing battle businesses face in guarding their trademarks against unauthorized use and dilution. The plaintiffs, Himalaya Wellness Company (and its affiliates) have cultivated a strong brand identity since 1930, offering a range of ayurvedic products, and have established "HIMALAYA" as a well-known trademark. In striking contrast, Greenland Trading Company, operated by Ms. Kamini Goel, allegedly represents the disruptive underbelly of commerce, featuring a similar branding strategy to capitalize on the reputation of the Himalaya mark. Through an in-depth analysis of the case's background, findings, and implications, we aim to understand the challenges and significance of trademark protection in the herbal industry, particularly for established brands like Himalaya Wellness.

Case Background

Founded in 1930, Himalaya Wellness has built a formidable presence in the herbal product market, offering various products ranging from personal care to pharmaceuticals. The company boasts of a well-recognized "HIMALAYA" trademark, complemented by a distinctive green-and-orange trade dress adopted over two decades ago. With an extensive distribution network that includes chemists, e-commerce platforms, and exclusive retail stores, Himalaya Wellness has become synonymous with quality in ayurvedic products.In June 2025, Himalaya Wellness discovered that Greenland Trading Company was selling nutraceutical and wellness products using a name and branding strikingly similar to "HIMALAYA." This similarity raised alarms about consumer confusion and potential brand dilution, prompting Himalaya Wellness to issue a cease-and-desist notice to Greenland Trading. Unfortunately, the absence of any response led the plaintiffs to pursue legal action, asserting that the defendant's actions were not only infringing upon their registered trademarks but also misleading consumers.

Key Legal Issues

The legal battle centers on several critical issues:

Ø  Trademark Infringement: The plaintiffs need to establish a prima facie case of trademark infringement. They must show that the defendant's use of "HIMALAYA," along with its deceptively similar trade dress, is likely to cause confusion among consumers regarding the source of the products.

Ø  Passing Off: The plaintiffs must demonstrate that the defendant's actions constitute passing off, meaning that they misrepresent their products as those of the plaintiffs, resulting in consumer deception and damage to the plaintiffs' brand reputation.

Ø  Urgent Interim Relief: Given the potential for irreparable harm, Himalaya Wellness sought urgent interim relief, requesting a temporary injunction to restrain Greenland Trading Company from using the impugned trademarks until the case is resolved.

Proceedings and Orders

The case was filed as CS(COMM) 1266/2025, with various interim applications submitted to the court, highlighting the urgency of the matter. The plaintiffs sought exemptions from certain procedural requirements, citing the immediate need for protection against the ongoing infringement. The court granted several requests, allowing for service of summons via WhatsApp, thereby expediting the legal process.The court acknowledged the claims of trademark infringement and passing off, permitting the case to proceed while scheduling a series of hearings to manage the timeline for pleadings and documentation. The judge emphasized the importance of resolving such disputes promptly to prevent greater harm to the parties involved, especially when the public interest and consumer welfare are at stake.

 To know more about this please check the link below.

Analysis of Trademark Infringement

Himalaya Wellness's claims of trademark infringement rely on established legal principles that address the likelihood of confusion in the marketplace. A trademark owner must protect its brand from similar names that could mislead consumers into confusing two different products. The test primarily considers:

Ø  Visual, Phonetic, and Structural Similarity: The court assesses whether the trademarks are visually and phonetically similar. In this case, "HIMALAYA" and variations used by Greenland Trading Company are likely to confuse consumers, especially given the shared market of ayurvedic and wellness products.

Ø  Identity of Goods: Both plaintiffs and defendants operate in identical categories of goods. This proximity in product offerings raises the stakes of confusion among consumers, as they may be unable to distinguish the source of the competing products.

Ø  Trade Channels: The overlap in distribution channels—Amazon and Flipkart, for example—further heightens the risk of consumer confusion.

Overall, the case reflects the balancing act courts must perform between allowing competition and protecting established trademarks from dilution and misrepresentation.

Implications for the Herbal Industry

The outcome of “Himalaya Wellness Company & Ors. v. Greenland Trading Company CS(COMM) 1266/2025”, holds significant implications for the herbal products industry. As the market for ayurvedic and wellness products continues to grow, so does the potential for trademark disputes. This case highlights the necessity for companies operating within this landscape to:

Ø  Implement Strong Brand Protection Strategies: Companies must ensure they have robust trademark registrations and protective measures in place to defend their brand identities. Regular monitoring of the market for potential infringements can deter competitors from encroaching on established trademarks.

Ø  Educate Consumers: Efforts should be made to raise awareness among consumers regarding the importance of purchasing from recognizable and established brands. Consumer education can mitigate the risks of confusion fostered by similarly branded products.

Ø  Seek Legal Remedies: When faced with infringement or passing off, companies must be prepared to take swift legal action. This case serves as a reminder that the courts can provide protective relief, emphasizing the need for timely responses to any violations.

Conclusion

The case of “Himalaya Wellness Company & Ors. v. Greenland Trading Company CS(COMM)1266/2025,” presents a critical examination of trademark law within the context of the herbal and wellness industry. As businesses navigate the complexities of brand protection, this legal confrontation underscores the ongoing relevance of trademarks as vital instruments for brand integrity and consumer trust. For Himalaya Wellness, the case represents a battleground for its hard-earned reputation and the necessity of safeguarding its intellectual property against infringement. As the case proceeds, it will be essential to observe the court's rulings and their wider implications for trademark law and the herbal product market. The intersection of creativity, commerce, and legal frameworks will continue to shape the landscape of brand protection, ensuring that both consumers and businesses can thrive in a fair marketplace.