A 20-year courtroom battle over whether a whisky brewed in Bangalore, India, qualifies as a “Scot” has ended in defeat for those who said och, never.

India’s Supreme Court has ruled that the makers of Peter Scot, one of the subcontinent’s most popular tipples, need not rename the product following a complaint from the Scotch Whisky Distillers Association (SWDA). The Edinburgh-based body first alleged in 1987 that the name misleadingly gives the impression that the India-brewed liquor has some sort of Scottish connection.

The judgement, which can not be appealed, is likely to be all the more galling for Scotch purists as India is ramping up its own efforts to protect indigenous products that have geographically significant names.

Last year the country registered 31 terms as non-infringable “geographical indications” (GI) under global trade rules — as many as it had logged in the preceding four years combined. GI status, which often allows goods to command premium prices, has been granted by the World Trade Organisation to products ranging from Darjeeling tea to Gujrat Pashminas and Mysore silk.

It is the GI scheme that prevents cheap sparkling wine from declaring itself to be champagne and forbids spam being marketed as parma ham. It also stops Peter Scot whisky from being called “Scotch”.

However, there are concerns that several countries are still allowing regional designations to be abused and some industries have been accused of passing off adulterated goods as expensive and sought-after niche varieties.

For instance, trade figures suggest that almost four times as much “Darjeeling tea” was sold last year than was produced in the north Indian region that gives the variety its name. It has been claimed that cheap tealeaves are smuggled by mule from Nepal and mixed with genuine Darjeeling. The blend is then sold as pure Darjeeling tea.

Other countries have been accused of similar lapses. France recently increased the number of plots of land where grapes may be grown to produce champagne, to fulfill surging world demand. Critics said the move undermined the credibility of a term that the country has defended fiercely for years — in part by blocking its use by British vintners.

The SWDA said yesterday that it was disappointed at a legal loss that may also induce a financial hangover. India is the world’s largest consumer of whisky, but just 1 per cent of the estimated billion litres of the spirit downed by the subcontinent every year is produced outside the country. Foreign firms are keen to secure any advantage they can to push their products in the fast-growing market.

Indian companies are fighting hard to maintain their dominance and have been backed up by stiff government import duties -- of 150 per cent -- on overseas drams. Khoday India, one of India’s largest spirits producers, started making Peter Scot in 1968 and registered the trademark in 1974. It said the SWDA’s case was baseless because it only made its complaint against the brand 13 years later.

The wrangle has fed the long-standing feud between Scotland’s distillers and their rivals on the subcontinent. In April, the Scotch Whisky Association (SWA) threatened to ask for trade sanctions against India if the country does not cut its draconian system of import tariffs and give foreign companies greater access to its seven billion pounds a year alcohol market.

The threat was criticised by Vijay Mallya, the billionaire head of UB Group, India’s largest spirits producer. He accused the SWA of being “paranoid” about India and gave warning that the body’s “heavy handed” approach could jeopardise Scottish distilleries’ prospects in the country.

Mr Mallya, who bought Whyte & Mackay, the Scottish distiller, for £595 million in 2006, controls about 60 per cent of the Indian whisky market. It is thought that he plans to start bottling Whyte & Mackay in India in the next few months.

Geographical limitations

— Under EU rules, “Newcastle Brown Ale” could only be brewed in Newcastle upon Tyne. When the brewery decided in 2004 to move to Gateshead it had to apply to have the geographical restriction revoked.

— Stilton cheese can only be produced in Derbyshire, Leicestershire, and Nottinghamshire. The village of Stilton is now in Cambridgeshire, so Stilton cheese cannot be produced there (though traditionally it was not, anyway).

— Gorgonzola, Parmigiano-Reggiano, Roquefort and Camembert de Normandie can only be named as such if they come from the designated region. By contrast, Cheddar can be made anywhere. The term is considered generic – partly because Cheddar, the place, could never hope to keep up with world demand for Cheddar, the cheese.

— Sales of wine from Champagne – a tiny village in Switzerland – plummeted by 70 per cent after makers there were forbidden to use the term

— France recently increased the number of plots of land where grapes may be used to make Champagne – a move that increased land prices by as much as 5 billion pounds.

Source: Times database

Times Recommends

• A track to Shangri-La: Bhutan gets first rail link
• Avatar takings hit $600m in ten days
• Bomb disposal squad is Times’s Team of the Year