Trademark and Copyright Infringement between Aquapeya and Bisleri

Trademark and Copyright Infringement between Aquapeya and Bisleri. The Bombay High Court has ordered bottled water brand Aquapeya to stop all operations. This includes manufacturing, packaging, marketing, and sales — following a trademark infringement and copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd., the country’s leading packaged drinking water company. This case has led to important questions in the startup world. The court’s quick action shows that trademark and copyright laws are taken seriously, especially in public cases like this. 
Aquapeya's Rise and Sudden Fall
Aquapeya, operated by Natvits Beverages, rose to national attention after securing Rs.70 lakh on Shark Tank India in January 2024. The investment came from panelists Namita Thapar (Emcure Pharmaceuticals) and Ritesh Agarwal (OYO Rooms), valuing the startup at approximately Rs.23.33 crore. However, just weeks after its TV debut, the brand’s success story took a legal turn.
According to court filings, Bisleri accused Aquapeya of copying its trademarked branding elements — specifically the green colour scheme and label design — which are legally protected under intellectual property laws. The court granted an interim injunction, ordering Aquapeya to immediately stop the production and distribution of its bottled water products.
The Shark Tank Episode That Triggered Legal Action
The lawsuit was prompted by Aquapeya’s pitch aired on Shark Tank India on January 20. During the episode, co-founders Tushar and Ravi Mundada responded to questions about the brand’s striking resemblance to Bisleri and other established players. The founders explained that the use of a green label was intentional — aimed at aligning with customer familiarity in regions where color recognition drives brand preference. Bisleri interpreted it as a direct exploitation of their brand goodwill and alleged that Aquapeya admitted to knowingly leveraging existing trademarks to gain consumer trust.
Legal and Ethical Concerns Around IP Misuse
The case has sparked a discussion about intellectual property (IP) awareness among startups and investors. Legal professionals argue that such open acknowledgment of brand imitation on national television undermines the very foundation of trademark law. The court’s swift action reflects the seriousness with which IP violations are now being addressed — especially in highly visible cases like this one.
Moreover, critics are raising questions about the vetting process on Shark Tank India. How did a startup allegedly infringing on a market leader’s IP make it to the final pitch stage? Should the show’s production team have conducted deeper due diligence?
Impact on Shark Tank’s Credibility
This controversy is not just a legal issue — it has also put a spotlight on the integrity of entrepreneurial television shows. With Aquapeya’s legal troubles now public, questions arise about the responsibility of shows like Shark Tank India in ensuring that the businesses they feature comply with basic legal and ethical standards.
Experts believe that by broadcasting a startup that openly modeled itself on another brand, the show may inadvertently have endorsed imitation rather than innovation — potentially sending the wrong message to aspiring entrepreneurs.
The Takeaway: Be Original from the Start
The Aquapeya vs. Bisleri case underscores the critical importance of IP compliance from day one. For startups, it’s a lesson in the risks of borrowing brand identity instead of building one. For investors, it's a call to include trademark verification in their due diligence process.
This isn’t the first time a rebranding or legal dispute has reshaped a startup’s journey. Take for example UrbanClap, which had to rebrand as Urban Company due to trademark issues in certain jurisdictions. Aquapeya's situation, however, is a much more direct confrontation with established IP law — and serves as a stronger cautionary tale. 
Conclusion
The incident is a timely reminder that legal clarity is as crucial as product-market fit. A compelling pitch and investor interest cannot shield a startup from the consequences of IP violations. Entrepreneurs must focus on authentic innovation, and not shortcuts that rely on the success of others. In a marketplace where trust and originality are key, true brand value lies in uniqueness — not mimicry. Aquapeya’s journey, though cut short, may still serve a larger purpose: educating India’s startup ecosystem on the high cost of overlooking intellectual property laws.

The Bombay High Court has ordered bottled water brand Aquapeya to stop all operations. This includes manufacturing, packaging, marketing, and sales — following a trademark infringement and copyright infringement lawsuit filed by Bisleri International Pvt. Ltd., the country’s leading packaged drinking water company. This case has led to important questions in the startup world. The court’s quick action shows that trademark and copyright laws are taken seriously, especially in public cases like this.

Aquapeya's Rise and Sudden Fall

Aquapeya, operated by Natvits Beverages, rose to national attention after securing Rs.70 lakh on Shark Tank India in January 2024. The investment came from panelists Namita Thapar (Emcure Pharmaceuticals) and Ritesh Agarwal (OYO Rooms), valuing the startup at approximately Rs.23.33 crore. However, just weeks after its TV debut, the brand’s success story took a legal turn.

According to court filings, Bisleri accused Aquapeya of copying its trademarked branding elements — specifically the green colour scheme and label design — which are legally protected under intellectual property laws. The court granted an interim injunction, ordering Aquapeya to immediately stop the production and distribution of its bottled water products.

The Shark Tank Episode That Triggered Legal Action

The lawsuit was prompted by Aquapeya’s pitch aired on Shark Tank India on January 20. During the episode, co-founders Tushar and Ravi Mundada responded to questions about the brand’s striking resemblance to Bisleri and other established players. The founders explained that the use of a green label was intentional — aimed at aligning with customer familiarity in regions where color recognition drives brand preference. Bisleri interpreted it as a direct exploitation of their brand goodwill and alleged that Aquapeya admitted to knowingly leveraging existing trademarks to gain consumer trust.

Legal and Ethical Concerns Around IP Misuse

The case has sparked a discussion about intellectual property (IP) awareness among startups and investors. Legal professionals argue that such open acknowledgment of brand imitation on national television undermines the very foundation of trademark law. The court’s swift action reflects the seriousness with which IP violations are now being addressed — especially in highly visible cases like this one.

Moreover, critics are raising questions about the vetting process on Shark Tank India. How did a startup allegedly infringing on a market leader’s IP make it to the final pitch stage? Should the show’s production team have conducted deeper due diligence?

Impact on Shark Tank’s Credibility

This controversy is not just a legal issue — it has also put a spotlight on the integrity of entrepreneurial television shows. With Aquapeya’s legal troubles now public, questions arise about the responsibility of shows like Shark Tank India in ensuring that the businesses they feature comply with basic legal and ethical standards.

Experts believe that by broadcasting a startup that openly modeled itself on another brand, the show may inadvertently have endorsed imitation rather than innovation — potentially sending the wrong message to aspiring entrepreneurs.

The Takeaway: Be Original from the Start

The Aquapeya vs. Bisleri case underscores the critical importance of IP compliance from day one. For startups, it’s a lesson in the risks of borrowing brand identity instead of building one. For investors, it's a call to include trademark verification in their due diligence process.

This isn’t the first time a rebranding or legal dispute has reshaped a startup’s journey. Take for example UrbanClap, which had to rebrand as Urban Company due to trademark issues in certain jurisdictions. Aquapeya's situation, however, is a much more direct confrontation with established IP law — and serves as a stronger cautionary tale.

Conclusion

The incident is a timely reminder that legal clarity is as crucial as product-market fit. A compelling pitch and investor interest cannot shield a startup from the consequences of IP violations. Entrepreneurs must focus on authentic innovation, and not shortcuts that rely on the success of others. In a marketplace where trust and originality are key, true brand value lies in uniqueness — not mimicry. Aquapeya’s journey, though cut short, may still serve a larger purpose: educating India’s startup ecosystem on the high cost of overlooking intellectual property laws.