Core Viewpoint - Radico Khaitan has received interim relief from the Punjab and Haryana High Court in a trademark dispute regarding its Kashmyr vodka, which is being challenged by Piccadily Agro Industries over alleged trademark infringement [1][2]. Trademark Dispute - The dispute involves Piccadily Agro Industries, which filed a commercial suit against Radico Khaitan in July, claiming that the use of "Kashmyr" for vodka products is similar to its registered trademarks "Cashmere" and "Cashmir" [1][2]. - Radico Khaitan was initially restricted from selling products under the Kashmyr name, but this order has been suspended pending a hearing scheduled for 13 November [2]. Allegations and Arguments - Piccadily Agro alleges that Radico Khaitan's use of "Kashmyr" creates "deceptive similarity" with its "Cashmere" trademark, which could confuse consumers due to phonetic similarities and similar pricing [3]. - Radico Khaitan contends that the lawsuit is not maintainable in Karnal, as it does not manufacture or sell products in Haryana and lacks an excise license there [3][4]. Business Performance - In August, Radico Khaitan reported a significant increase in quarterly sales, with a 32% rise in net revenue from operations to ₹15.06 billion ($171.8 million) for the quarter ending June [5].

Core Viewpoint - A local court has temporarily prohibited Radico Khaitan from selling its Kashmyr vodka brand due to a trademark dispute with Piccadily Agro Industries [1][4]. Group 1: Trademark Dispute - Piccadily Agro Industries filed a commercial suit against Radico Khaitan in July, alleging that the use of "Kashmyr" for vodka products infringes on its registered trademarks "Cashmere" and "Cashmir" [1][2]. - The court has granted an interim injunction, restraining Radico Khaitan from manufacturing, selling, or promoting products under the Kashmyr brand [3][4]. - Piccadily Agro claims that the similarity in names and product categories is likely to cause consumer confusion [2][5]. Group 2: Company Responses - Radico Khaitan has not provided detailed comments on the ongoing legal matter, citing that it is sub-judice, but has expressed confidence in the legal process [6].