Back
C. HARI SHANKAR
Sun Pharma Laboratories Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Finecure Pharmaceuticals Ltd. – Respondent
JUDGMENT
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Facts
The Plaint
1. The plaintiff claims to be the largest pharmaceutical company in India in 11 specialties, and the fourth largest Generic Pharmaceutical Company in the world, with a global turnover of Rs. 33,139 crores. Among other products, the plaintiff manufactures and markets pantoprazole, a well-known anti-acidity drug, under the brand name PANTOCID, in various variants, stand alone as well as in combination with other drugs. Where pantoprazole is to be found in combination with other drugs, appropriate suffixes attach to PANTOCID, such as PANTOCID-DSR, PANTOCID-L, and the like. The plaintiff holds registrations for the marks PANTOCID, PANTOCID-DSR, PANTOCID-IV and PANTOCID-L, under the Trade Marks Act, 1999, w.e.f. 19 February 1998, 30 August 2020, 8 September 2020 and 1 May 2020, respectively. Sales of the PANTOCID range of drugs have resulted in earnings to the plaintiff, during the years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022, of Rs. 386.8 crores and Rs. 513.63 crores. Para 11 of the plaint asserts that "the trademark PANTOCID was coined by the plaintiff's predecessor in the year 1998 and has been in use since the year 1999."
2. The plaintiff has asserted,
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of the Trade Marks Act in determining deceptive similarity and infringement of a registered trade mark, including the presumption o....
Phonetic similarity between AZIWOK and AZIWAKE creates likelihood of confusion, warranting injunction to prevent trademark infringement.
Phonetic similarity between API-derived pharma marks suffices for passing-off injunction despite defendant's registration, if plaintiff proves prior goodwill via sales evidence; infringement barred w....
The court ruled on trademark infringement, emphasizing phonetic and visual similarity between ISITE and EYESITE, resulting in consumer confusion, leading to a permanent injunction against the infring....
The court emphasized that the likelihood of confusion due to phonetic, visual, and structural similarities between registered trademarks is critical, particularly in the pharmaceutical industry, warr....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the defendant's use of 'NOVAKIND Biosciences Pvt Ltd' as a trade mark for pharmaceutical products constituted infringement under Section 29(2)....
Point of Law : The use of the mark “CINZITAS” would also create confusion, as there was a possibility of people mistaking the defendants’ product to be that of the plaintiff.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
