FASHION'S FIERCE FIGHT: THE SUNDERBANS COLLECTION LAWSUIT

Soumya Juneja
Sep 25
3 min read

INTRODUCTION

The Delhi High Court in the case of Rahul Mishra v. Nishchaiy Sajdeh & Ors.,^[1] delivered a landmark order in relation to copyright infringement and designer rights. This case has set a significant and relevant precedent for the Intellectual Property and Indian Fashion industry. The Delhi High Court's ruling in favor of renowned designer Rahul Mishra addressed the unauthorized copying and replication of his original textile designs, most notably his distinctive 'Tigress' motif and accompanying floral patterns from his 'Sunderbans' collection. The Court granted an ex parte ad-interim injunction against the manufacturers and sellers of these counterfeit garments.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Plaintiff in this case is a celebrated and renowned fashion designer from India, who is well acclaimed globally as well. In 2023, the Plaintiff showcased his new collection in the Paris Haute Couture Week in which his most famous and recurring design was a “Tigress” motif with hand embroidered design. In 2024, Mark Zuckerberg wore a shirt from the Plaintiff’s new collection for the Ambani pre-wedding celebrations.^[2] Consequently, counterfeits of the same motif were everywhere. It gained further limelight when famous Indian celebrities/influencers, like Badshah, Orry, Kapil Sharma, etc started wearing the knock-off of the design. Through this act, these celebrities were unintentionally endorsing the production and sale of these counterfeits. When several businesses started copying the Plaintiff’s well-known designs, the Plaintiff approached the Delhi High Court to sue the eighteen Defendants for manufacturing, mass-producing and selling Plaintiff’s designs.

ISSUES

Whether the Defendants have infringed upon the Plaintiff’s copyright and design by replicating their unique designs?

LEGAL ANALYSIS AND REASONING

The Defendants in this case were not just distributors of these fraudulent imitations but also sellers and producers. The Court discussed artistic expression, dilution of brand identity and rights of designers, amongst various other relevant concepts in this case. Section 2(c) of the Copyright Act, 1957 defines ‘artistic work’ i.e., any original artwork that is unique and created in a tangible form, this ranges from photographs, paintings to any other form of craftsmanship. This section inherently includes artistic designs and protects the same as well. The Delhi Court established that there is copyright infringement as the “Tigress” motif were unmistakably the Plaintiff’s original work and by copying the work in a deceptively similar manner, the Defendants have drawn direct inspiration and hence, it is direct infringement.^[3]

(Some instances of infringement, Source: The Delhi High Court Order)

The Court even highlighted the human aspect of this infringement. Imitation of work leads to brand dilution which, therefore, affects the brand identity of the Plaintiff. This dilution not only confuses the consumers but threatens brand value as well. Unauthorised copying of original designs amounts to theft. The Delhi HC stated that “Whenever a designer goes to court over plagiarism, this order will be referred to”, while giving the order.

DECISION

The Delhi High Court established a prime facie case and granted an immediate interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff on August 4, 2025. The High Court restrained multiple Defendants from selling, promoting and manufacturing products that have any representation of the Tigress artwork or anything similar to it. Further, the Court discontinued businesses from “reproducing, adapting, distributing, displaying, or otherwise exploiting this copyright, in whole or in part, on social media platforms, e-commerce websites, or any other online or offline medium”.

CONCLUSION

This is considered to be a landmark order as it protects the rights and livelihood of artisans along with intellectual property rights. This was a necessary order as the consumer-base and trade channels of the Plaintiff and Defendants are overlapping and it would have led to increase in brand dilution and likelihood of confusion. In essence, the Rahul Mishra order solidifies the protection of original creative expression, sends a strong deterrent message to mass-market copycats, and ultimately contributes to safeguarding the economic and cultural value of handcrafted luxury within Indian fashion.