Delhi High Court Restrains Trademark Infringement of 'PUSHPARAJ' Tobacco Brand Against Deceptively Similar 'PUSHPA' Mark

In a significant move to protect intellectual property rights, the Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte interim injunction in favor of Borsad Tobacco Company Private Limited against S T Products, a firm allegedly mimicking the plaintiff's established tobacco brand. The order issued by Hon'ble Ms. Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora addresses the unauthorized use of a mark that threatens the market presence and consumer trust of the well-known 'PUSHPARAJ' tobacco line.

Facts of the Dispute

Borsad Tobacco Company, a manufacturer in the premium-grade chewing tobacco sector, launched its brand 'PUSHPARAJ' (with the Hindi transliteration 'पुष्पराज') in 2018. Holding a registered trademark in Class 34, the company recorded significant annual sales, solidifying its reputation in the market.

The dispute arose in April 2025, when the plaintiff discovered that S T Products had entered the market with a chewing tobacco brand labeled 'PUSHPA' (Hindi: 'पुष्पा'). Investigations commissioned by the Plaintiff revealed that the Defendant’s products were being manufactured and sold under highly irregular conditions, lacking the mandatory health warnings required under the Cigarettes and Other Tobacco Products (Prohibition of Advertisement and Regulation of Trade and Commerce, Production, Supply and Distribution) Act, 2003 .

The Plaintiff’s Position

The Plaintiff contended that the Defendant’s mark is not only phonetically similar to its registered trademark but also adopts a visual presentation that specifically targets the goodwill built by 'PUSHPARAJ'. Allegations surfaced that the Defendant was procuring unbranded leaves and repackaging them with deceptive labeling to trick consumers into associating the counterfeit products with the Plaintiff’s brand. Furthermore, the Plaintiff pointed out that the Defendant had made no effort to register the 'PUSHPA' mark.

Legal Analysis and Court Findings

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, after reviewing the evidence and comparison charts provided by the Plaintiff, concurred that the marks were indeed deceptively similar. The Court emphasized that in the consumer goods sector, such similarities often lead to confusion, causing damage to the registered proprietor.

The court underscored that the Plaintiff had sufficiently established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience heavily favored the Plaintiff given the potential for consumer confusion in the identical trade channels.

Key Observations

The judgment clarifies the standards for protecting registered trademarks against localized infringement:

• On Phonetic Similarity: "The Plaintiff’s registered mark ‘PUSHPARAJ’/‘पुष्पराज’ when compared with Defendant’s unregistered mark ‘PUSHPA’/‘पुष्पा’ is deceptively similar. The marks are phonetically similar."
• On Potential Confusion: "The Defendant’s use and adoption of the deceptively similar Plaintiff’s Marks for identical goods, which are sold through the same trade channel at the same trade counter is bound to cause confusion to the consumers and cause loss of sales to the Plaintiff."
• On Urgent Relief: "Plaintiff has established a prima facie case for grant of an ex-parte ad-interim against the Defendant. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of Plaintiff."

Court’s Decision

The Court restrained S T Products, its proprietors, and agents from manufacturing, selling, advertising, or dealing with the mark 'PUSHPA' or any other mark deceptively similar to 'PUSHPARAJ'. This order prevents the defendant from leveraging the established brand equity of the plaintiff and enforces strict compliance with trademark boundaries.

The matter is set to be reviewed by the Joint Registrar on February 19, 2026, with the final court hearing scheduled for May 22, 2026. This judgment serves as a stern reminder that even small-scale manufacturers cannot ignore statutory registration requirements or engage in deceptive branding practices that mirror established trademarks.