As per case facts, Amara Raja Energy and Mobility Limited (appellant) appealed against a judgment granting injunctions to Exide Industries Limited (respondent) in a trademark infringement and passing off suit. ... The appellant argued that the respondent lacked monopoly over the color red for trade dress, the original prayers were flawed, and the respondent's historical claim of consistent red use was contradicted by its own diverse color usage. The appellant maintained its adoption of red was for product visibility, not to mislead consumers. The question arose whether the appellant's use of a predominantly red color trade dress for automotive batteries, combined with other similar design elements, amounted to passing off and infringement of the respondent's established trade dress and trademarks. Finally, the High Court upheld the injunction, determining that the respondent had prima facie proven the color red as a distinctive source identifier through long and extensive use. The court observed that the appellant had previously associated itself with green and even campaigned against red, acknowledging color as an identifier. The court found the competing products' trade dress to be deceptively similar, with insufficient distinguishing features to prevent consumer confusion, especially given the shared five-letter word structure and the 'shattered O' device in white on a red background. The court therefore found no reason to overturn the interim relief.