Maggi Trademark Case : How Nestlé Defended Its Iconic Brand

Editorial illustration of Maggi noodles bowl facing Maggisun pressure cooker with scales of justice symbolizing Delhi High Court trademark case over brand similarity
Maggi Trademark Case : How Nestlé Defended Its Iconic Brand from Cookers to Noodles

The trademark infringement suit Maggi vs Maggisun before the Delhi High Court was initiated in 2018 over intellectual property rights. The dispute arose from Nestlé’s claim that the Indian utensil manufacturer’s use of the brand name “Maggisun” for products like pressure cookers was deceptively similar to “Maggi” trademark.

Nestlé argued that this similarity was designed to exploit their reputation and the consumer goodwill associated with their iconic food brand, leading to a high likelihood of consumer confusion and dilution of their brand equity.

This particular case stands as a prominent example of a multinational conglomerate guarding its brand equity in the Indian market. The seven year long legal battle was a critical test of the principle of protecting a well-known trademark against unauthorized use across non competing goods.

Maggi is an established brand of Nestlé and has been used in India for decades as instant noodles and other food products. They argued that it is to mislead the consumer into believing that the utensils were either manufactured by or endorsed by Nestlé/Maggi brand. This in term allowed the defendant to take unfair advantage of the enormous goodwill and reputation associated with ‘Maggi’ name.

Both the parties reached out-of-court settlement. The settlement saw the utensil manufacturer agree to stop using ‘Maggisun’ mark entirely, reinforcing Nestlé’s exclusive rights over ‘Maggi’ trademark.

Settlement Terms:

  • Shankeshwar Utensils acknowledged Nestle as the rightful proprietor of the ‘Maggi’ trademark.
  • The defendant agreed to cease manufacturing, selling or advertising any goods under the mark ‘Maggisun’ or any other mark identical or similar to ‘Maggi’.
  • The defending committed to destroy or existing products, packaging and labels bearing the ‘Maggisun’ mark.
  • They further agreed to withdraw their trademark registration for ‘Maggisun’.

Conclusion:

The decree of the Delhi High Court in this particular suit in terms of the settlement legally binds both the parties to its comprehensive terms. This formal judicial stamp signals that brand owners like Nestlé are committed to defending their intellectual property, while out-of-courtsettlement provides a pragmatic model for resolving complex trademark battles. This case secures  Nestlé’s brand equity and sets a clear precedent against the unauthorized adoption of renowned marks in the intellectual property arena. 

✍️ Adv. Mamta Singh Shukla
Advocate, Supreme Court of India | Legal Researcher | PoSH Trainer

🔗Other Posts 

      


Comments

  1. "Nice blog! Good content and well explained. Keep up the good work!"

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Allahabad High Court Bans Caste in Police Records & Stickers | Landmark Equality Judgment 2025

Maharishi Valmiki Jayanti 2025: Original Life Lessons and Hidden Wisdom of Ramayana

Is Artificial Intelligence an Existential Threat to Humanity? | AI Ethics & Future Risks