No Relief for Bata, Liberty as Supreme Court Rejects Plea against Revival of Crocs’ Passing off Suits
S N Thyagarajan (Bar  and  Bench) 14 November 2025
The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed petitions filed by Bata India and Liberty Shoes challenging the Delhi High Court’s July 2025 judgment that had revived Crocs Inc. USA’s passing off suits against several Indian footwear manufacturers, including Bata, Liberty, Relaxo, and Action Shoes. [Bata India, Liberty Vs Crocs India USA].
 
A Bench of Justices Sanjay Kumar and Alok Aradhe said,
 
"We are not inclined to entertain this plea. The Delhi High Court has merely restored the suits for consideration by the trial court ... We, however, make it clear that the trial court of the learned single judge shall consider the matters uninfluenced by any observations made by the division bench or by the dismissal of these SLPs. Question of law kept open."
 
 
The matter concerns litigation initiated by Crocs Inc. USA before the Delhi High Court over the alleged passing off of its distinctive foam clogs by several Indian footwear manufacturers.
 
Crocs claimed that companies such as Bata India, Liberty Shoes, Relaxo Footwear, Action Shoes, Aqualite, and Bioworld Merchandising copied the shape, configuration, and perforated design of its clogs - elements that Crocs argued function as a shape trademark or trade dress, thereby misleading consumers and riding on the reputation Crocs has built globally.
 
In a judgment dated February 18, 2019, a single-judge of the Delhi High Court dismissed all six passing off suits at the preliminary stage, holding that they were not maintainable.
 
The core reasoning was that Crocs could not claim passing off protection for the same product configuration that was already protected as a registered design.
 
However, in July this year, a High Court Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Ajay Digpaul overturned the 2019 single-judge order.
 
This prompted Bata and Liberty to approach the Supreme Court.
 
Liberty contended that the Division Bench erred in law and misinterpreted the Full Bench ruling of the Delhi High Court in Carlsberg Breweries A/S v. Som Distilleries and Breweries Ltd. The company said that Carlsberg clearly held that once a design is registered, its proprietor cannot claim passing off rights over the same features, and that a passing off claim must involve “something more” - a broader trade dress or get-up beyond the registered design.
 
The petition said that allowing Crocs’ suits to proceed would effectively grant it a “dual monopoly,” giving perpetual common law protection under trademark law for what the Designs Act permits to be protected only for a limited term.
 
It submitted that the High Court overlooked Section 2(d) of the Designs Act, which expressly excludes trademarks from the definition of a design
 
The petition also asserted that the High Court's Division Bench failed to apply the earlier Full Bench decision in Mohan Lal v. Sona Paint & Hardwares, which had held that a design forms part of the goods, whereas a trademark is “something extra” used to denote trade origin. Once a design registration expires, it falls into the public domain, and its use cannot be monopolised through passing off, Liberty said, among other arguments.
 
Bata was represented by Senior Advocate Neeraj Kishan Kaul
 
 
Liberty was represented by Advocate Saikrishna Rajagopal from Saikrishna & Associates.
 
 
Comments
Bombay HC Orders Notice for CBI Probe into RIL’s Alleged US$1.55bn Natural Gas Heist from ONGC: Reports
Moneylife Digital Team 14 November 2025
The Bombay High Court (HC) has issued a notice in a petition that seeks a full-fledged criminal investigation by the central bureau of investigation (CBI) into alleged gas theft by Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) and its directors,...
When Hinduja Boarded the Leyland Bus
Ranganathan V, 14 November 2025
In 1983, Swraj Paul, in the status of a non-resident Indian (NRI), wished to take over a couple of Indian companies whose stock prices were underperforming, only to be deterred by the hurdles posed by the system and finally gave...
Companies Buying Software to Run Business Are Not ‘Consumers’, Can't File Consumer Complaints: Supreme Court
Ritwik Choudhury (Bar  and  Bench) 14 November 2025
The Supreme Court recently held that a company purchasing software to organise or automate its business processes cannot claim to be a “consumer” under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 [Poly Medicure Ltd. vs. M/S Brillio Technologies...
India's Cement Capacity Addition To See 75% Jump over FY26-28: CRISIL
Moneylife Digital Team 12 November 2025
India’s cement industry is set for one of its biggest expansion phases yet, with total grinding capacity expected to rise by 160–170mn (million) tonnes (MT) between financial years (FYs)25-26 and 27-28, a sharp 75% jump compared with...
Free Helpline
Legal Credit
Feedback