ITC Britannia Packaging War: Calcutta HC Battle Begins

The fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sector in India is witnessing a significant legal showdown. Industry giants ITC Limited and Britannia Industries Limited are locked in an intellectual property dispute. This high-stakes battle unfolds in the Calcutta High Court, focusing on alleged packaging imitation.

ITC has initiated a commercial intellectual property suit against Britannia. The core of the complaint centers on Britannia's '50-50 Cheese variant' biscuit packaging. ITC claims this new product infringes upon the distinctive trade dress of its 'Sunfeast Wowzers' cheese biscuit.

The Core Dispute: Packaging Imitation Claims Worth ₹50 Crores

ITC Limited has accused Britannia Industries Limited of copyright infringement and passing off. This dispute emerged after Britannia launched its '50-50 Cheese variant' biscuit in January 2026. ITC alleges that Britannia's packaging directly imitates its established 'Sunfeast Wowzers' cheese variant, launched in November 2024.

The legal action, case number IP-COM/2/2026, was heard by Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur in the Intellectual Property Rights Division of the Calcutta High Court. ITC seeks substantial punitive damages, demanding ₹50 crores from Britannia for the alleged infringement.

• ITC's 'Sunfeast Wowzers' Market Impact: The biscuit achieved sales of approximately ₹51.45 crores within one year of its launch.
• Launch Timelines: ITC's 'Sunfeast Wowzers' debuted in November 2024; Britannia's '50-50 Cheese variant' launched in January 2026.
• Legal Basis: The suit is filed under the Copyright Act and the Law of Passing Off.

Decoding ITC's 'Sunfeast Wowzers' Packaging Distinctiveness Since 2024

ITC emphasizes the unique characteristics of its 'Sunfeast Wowzers' packaging, which has been in the market since November 2024. The company highlights its distinctive black, yellow, and orange design. This color scheme was an unconventional choice in the cheese biscuit segment, helping 'Wowzers' stand out.

ITC holds registered copyright No. AT-20250162979 for the artistic work on its 'Wowzers' packaging. This registration provides a strong legal foundation for its claims. The company asserts that this combination of elements constitutes a unique trade dress that Britannia has allegedly copied.

Key Design Elements Allegedly Copied:

1. Dominant Color Scheme: A black base combined with prominent yellow and orange highlights.
2. Cracker Representation: An angled depiction of a rectangular cracker, featuring molten cheese.
3. Typography: The use of liquid-effect lettering for product branding.
4. Overall Trade Dress: The combination of these visual elements creates a distinctive consumer impression.

ITC states that these elements were deliberately chosen to create a unique identity. The company invested significantly in developing and promoting this packaging. The success of 'Sunfeast Wowzers' validates its distinctiveness and market acceptance.

The Legal Pillars: Copyright Act & Law of Passing Off

The lawsuit brought by ITC against Britannia rests on two fundamental legal principles: copyright infringement and passing off. These are critical aspects of intellectual property law designed to protect creators and consumers.

Copyright infringement protects original artistic and literary works, including packaging designs. ITC claims that Britannia's packaging directly reproduces or substantially imitates the artistic work on its 'Sunfeast Wowzers' wrapper. The registered copyright (No. AT-20250162979) for the 'Wowzers' artistic work is a central piece of evidence in this argument.

The Law of Passing Off addresses misrepresentation. It prevents one business from misleading consumers into believing that its goods or services are those of another. ITC argues that Britannia's similar packaging design could confuse consumers, leading them to associate Britannia's product with ITC's established 'Sunfeast Wowzers' brand. This creates an unfair advantage for Britannia and causes harm to ITC's goodwill.

Calcutta High Court's Initial Ruling: No Ad-Interim Injunction on February 6, 2026

The initial hearing of this significant IP dispute took place on February 6, 2026. Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur presided over the proceedings in the Intellectual Property Rights Division of the Calcutta High Court. The court carefully heard arguments from both ITC and Britannia.

At this initial stage, the Court did not grant ITC's request for an ad-interim injunction against Britannia. An ad-interim injunction would have immediately halted Britannia's sale of the '50-50 Cheese variant'. This decision signifies that the court requires further evidence and consideration before imposing such a restrictive measure.

Key Outcomes of the February 6, 2026 Hearing:

• Judge: Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur.
• Case Number: IP-COM/2/2026.
• Court's Decision: No ad-interim injunction granted.
• Next Steps: Both parties were directed to exchange affidavits, outlining their detailed arguments and evidence.
• Next Hearing Date: The matter is scheduled for further hearing on February 26, 2026.

Britannia, during the proceedings, disputed the geographical scope of its product launch. This suggests that the extent of the alleged infringement and market presence will be a key point of contention moving forward. The court's directive for affidavits prepares the ground for a more detailed examination of the facts and legal positions of both FMCG giants.

Future Implications for FMCG Branding and IP Protection Post-2026

This ongoing legal battle between ITC and Britannia carries significant implications for the broader FMCG industry, particularly concerning brand protection and intellectual property. The outcome of this case, particularly the ruling on punitive damages, could set a precedent for future packaging disputes. Brands invest heavily in creating distinctive packaging to establish identity and consumer recognition. Cases like these underscore the critical need for robust IP strategies.

The dispute highlights the fine line between inspiration and imitation in a competitive market. As new products constantly emerge, companies must navigate how they design and launch their offerings without infringing on existing rights. This situation could prompt FMCG companies to review their product development and design processes more stringently.

Wider Industry Considerations:

• Increased Scrutiny: Companies may face heightened scrutiny over packaging similarities, leading to more cautious design processes.
• Innovation vs. Protection: Balancing the need for market innovation with the imperative to protect established brands becomes crucial.
• Legal Costs: IP litigation can be costly and time-consuming, influencing business strategies and product launches.
• Consumer Trust: Maintaining unique brand identities helps build and sustain consumer trust in product authenticity.

The Calcutta High Court's final decision, especially regarding the substantial ₹50 crores in damages sought by ITC, will be closely watched. This will undoubtedly influence how FMCG players approach competitive product design and packaging in India beyond 2026. The emphasis on trade dress and copyright registration will likely grow stronger across the sector.

Understanding 'Passing Off' in the Indian Market

The concept of 'passing off' is a vital legal remedy in intellectual property law. It protects the goodwill and reputation of a business from unfair competition. In India, the Law of Passing Off operates to prevent one trader from representing their goods or services as being those of another. This doctrine does not require registration, unlike copyright or trademark, relying instead on established reputation and goodwill.

For a claim of passing off to succeed, the plaintiff generally needs to demonstrate three key elements, often referred to as the 'classic trinity' or 'five senses' in some jurisdictions: Goodwill, Misrepresentation, and Damage. ITC must establish that it has significant goodwill associated with its 'Sunfeast Wowzers' packaging.

Elements of a Passing Off Claim:

• Goodwill: The plaintiff must prove ownership of a reputation or goodwill in the market attached to the packaging or trade dress.
• Misrepresentation: The defendant's actions (e.g., similar packaging) must amount to a misrepresentation that misleads or is likely to mislead the public.
• Damage: The plaintiff must show that they have suffered, or are likely to suffer, damage to their business or goodwill as a result of the misrepresentation.

In this case, ITC argues that Britannia's '50-50 Cheese variant' packaging causes confusion among consumers. This confusion, ITC asserts, allows Britannia to "pass off" its product as ITC's. The substantial sales figures of 'Sunfeast Wowzers' (₹51.45 crores) are central to establishing ITC's goodwill in its packaging.

The Continuing Saga: What to Expect Next on February 26, 2026

The legal proceedings between ITC and Britannia are far from over. The Calcutta High Court has scheduled the next hearing for February 26, 2026. This upcoming date will be critical for both parties as they present their detailed arguments.

Both ITC and Britannia are now preparing to exchange affidavits, which will contain comprehensive evidence and legal submissions. These affidavits will serve as the primary written statements to the court, outlining each company's complete case. ITC will likely elaborate on the specifics of the alleged design infringement and the commercial impact, reinforcing its demand for an injunction and ₹50 crores in punitive damages.

Britannia, conversely, will present its defense, potentially arguing against the originality or distinctiveness of ITC's packaging. They may also challenge the extent of alleged similarities or the actual likelihood of consumer confusion. Their previous dispute over the geographical scope of their product launch suggests that market reach and competitive landscape will also be key defense points.

Upcoming Proceedings will Focus On:

• Detailed Evidence: Examination of expert reports, market research, and design comparisons.
• Legal Arguments: In-depth interpretations of the Copyright Act and the Law of Passing Off.
• Commercial Impact: Assessing the financial damage claimed by ITC and the market dynamics.
• Possible Injunction: The court will reconsider the request for an interim injunction after reviewing the affidavits.

The outcome of the February 26, 2026 hearing could significantly influence the trajectory of this high-profile FMCG intellectual property dispute. It will determine whether the court perceives sufficient grounds for an interim injunction, a measure that could have immediate and substantial effects on Britannia's '50-50 Cheese variant' sales. The legal community and the FMCG sector will be closely monitoring these developments, understanding that such decisions can shape future branding strategies and intellectual property enforcement within India.

Conclusion: A Landmark IP Battle in India's FMCG Landscape

The intellectual property dispute between ITC Limited and Britannia Industries Limited marks a significant moment in India's FMCG sector. The case, currently unfolding in the Calcutta High Court, highlights the intense competition and the critical importance of distinct branding and packaging. With ITC seeking ₹50 crores in punitive damages and alleging both copyright infringement and passing off, this lawsuit underscores the value companies place on their unique market identity.

The initial hearing before Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur on February 6, 2026, set the stage for a detailed legal battle, with the court calling for affidavits before considering an interim injunction. As the industry awaits the next hearing on February 26, 2026, the outcome promises to offer crucial insights into intellectual property protection in India. This will influence how giants like ITC and Britannia innovate and compete in the dynamic consumer goods market for years to come.