Case Name / Appeal: Civil Appeal No(s). of 2026 (Special Leave Petition No(s). 18549/2026)
Court: Supreme Court of India, Civil Appellate Jurisdiction
Order Date: 27 May 2026
Underlying Order: Impugned final judgment and order dated 02‑04‑2026 passed by the High Court at Calcutta (Temp‑Inj‑IPD No. 7/2025)
Previous Order Referenced: Order dated 25‑05‑2026 directing filing of affidavit
Parties Involved
Appellant / Petitioner: Amara Raja Energy Mobility Ltd (public listed company)
Respondent: Exide Industries Ltd
Counsel for Appellant: Senior Advocates C. Aryama Sundaram, Shyam Divan, Sidharth Luthra, among others
Counsel for Respondent: Senior Advocate Mukul Rohatgi, Neeraj Kishan Kaul, and team
Affiant: Radhakrishnan Chandrasekar, Chief Business Officer – India & SAARC – Automotive and Home Energy, Amara Raja Energy Mobility Ltd
Bench: Hon’ble Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjwal Bhuyn
Issues / Allegations / Violations
Dispute over the trade dress (red colour and branding) of ELITO‑branded batteries produced by Amara Raja and alleged infringement of Exide’s trade dress.
Temporary injunction previously restraining Amara Raja from selling/red‑packaging the batteries and from using empty cartons bearing the disputed trade dress.
Questions regarding the quantity and value of unsold inventory held by Amara Raja, its distributors, and retailers.
Request for permission to dispose of existing stock that cannot be re‑branded without waste.
Findings & Observations
The affidavit confirms that Amara Raja manufactured ELITO batteries with a red trade dress on both the battery and its carton.
Inventory details as of 25‑05‑2026:
Unsold with distributors/franchisees: 1,38,477 units valued at Rs 24.99 Crores.
Estimated unsold with retailers: ~81,000 units valued at Rs 15.60 Crores (estimate based on distributor information).
Stock in possession of Amara Raja: 20,789 units valued at Rs 2.63 Crores.
No production of the subject product occurred after 29‑03‑2026; the last invoice was dated 31‑03‑2026.
Each battery and carton carries month‑year of manufacture and a unique 14‑digit serial number (last unit serial: CFE4213A325967); no separate batch number.
The Court observed that the unsold products with distributors/franchisees are no longer under direct control of the appellant; they are held on a principal‑to‑principal basis.
Penalties / Settlements / Directions
Modification of Temporary Injunction:
The Court permits the appellant’s products packaged in red‑coloured cartons to be sold by third‑party franchises/distributors or retailers to customers.
The injunction continues only with respect to the 1,44,547 empty cartons, which the Court directs to be destroyed and not utilised.
No monetary penalty is imposed; the direction focuses on disposal and continued restriction on empty cartons.
Corrective Actions & Future Obligations
Amara Raja must destroy the 1,44,547 empty cartons bearing the disputed trade dress.
The company may market and sell the 20,789 units (Rs 2.63 Crores) it holds, as well as the inventory with distributors/retailers, provided the packaging is not red or identical to Exide’s.
No further production of the red‑trade‑dress batteries is allowed unless the Court lifts the injunction.
Final Ruling & Enforcement
The appeal is allowed in‑part; the order of temporary injunction is modified as described above.
The Court emphasizes that this modification does not affect the merits of the underlying suit between Amara Raja and Exide.
All pending applications, if any, are to stand disposed of.
The order is effective immediately and enforceable by the Court.
