IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
C. Hari Shankar, J.
Dr. Reddys Laboratories Limited - Appellant
Versus
Smart Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. - Respondent
CS(COMM) 744 of 2023
Decided On : 16-11-2023
JUDGMENT
I.A. 20597/2023(Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of the CPC)
Facts
1. The trade mark AZIWOK was registered under Section 23 of the Trade Marks Act 1999, in favour of Wockhardt Ltd in Class 5, covering "medicinal, pharmaceutical and veterinary preparations and sanitary substances" with effect from 30 December 1994. The registration is valid and subsisting as on date. Wockhardt assigned the registration of the mark AZIWOK in favour of the plaintiff vide Assignment Deed dated 9 June 2020, along with goodwill earned by the mark. The plaintiff has applied to the Registry of Trade Marks on 7 September 2020 for substitution of the name of the plaintiff in place of Wockhardt as the proprietor of the trade mark AZIWOK.
2. AZIWOK is admittedly a portmanteau of "AZI" and "WOK". "AZI" is an abbreviation for azithromycin, which is the Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) of the product. "WOK" is an abbreviation for "Wockhardt". Under the name AZIWOK, Wockhardt and, later, the plaintiff has been selling azithromycin in various strengths. Azithromycin, it may be recollected, is one of the most frequently prescribed antimicrobials, which was used fairly extensively during the COVID-19 pandemic.
3. The brand name AZIWOK, asserts the plaint, has been in use by Wockhardt since 1994, when it was registered. Cumulative sales figures of AZIWOK have been provided for the financial years 2020-21, 2021-22 and 2022-23. Sales of AZIWOK have earned, for the plaintiff, Rs.14,27,15,095/- in the 2020-2021, Rs.21,62,34,124/- in 2021-2022 and Rs.18,05,33,887/- in 2022-2023.
4. Mr. Ranjan Narula has also drawn my attention to the following documents evidencing use of the trade mark AZIWOK, by the plaintiff, at least since 2003:
(i) In Essentials of Medical Pharmacology, 6th edition by Professor K.D. Tripathi, published in 2003, there is a reference to "AZITHRAL 250, 500 mg cap and 250 mg per 5 ml dry syr; AZ IWOK 250 mg cap, 100 mg kid tab, 100 mg/5 ml and 200 mg/5 ml susp. AZIWIN 100, 250, 500 mg tab, 200 mg/5 ml liq. Also, AZITHRAL 500 mg inj."
(ii) In the abstract of the article "Voltammetric determination of azithromycin at the carbon paste electrode" by Othman Abd EI-Moaty Farghaly and Niveen Abdel Latif Mohamed, published on 27 February 2004 in Volume 62 of the journal Talanta, Issue 3, the following figures:
"The work presented here shows that a new method for determining azithromycin at trace level in pure, dosage forms (Aziwok powder for oral suspension and Xithrone capsules samples) and in the biological samples (spiked and real urine samples), using square-wave anodic adsorptive stripping voltammetry at a paraffin oil CPE. At present, only few studies dealing with azithromycin electrochemical oxidation behavior have been reported [7], [19]. The voltammetric determination of azithromycin by a square-wave stripping voltammetry at a paraffin oil modified carbon paste electrode has not been studied yet."
(iii) In the journal Emkay Research dated 2 November 2012, the topmost 25 brands, constituting 69% of overall domestic sales have been tabulated, in which AZIWOK figures at the 14th place.
(iv) Similarly, in the list of essential medicines released by the State of Rajasthan in 2013, azithromycin tablets of 500 mg strength figured at Serial No. 129, with the common brands of azithromycin being noted as AZITHRAL, AZEE and AZIWOK.
(v) In the article "cost analysis of commonly used drugs under price control in India; assessing the fact on drug price order on brand price variation", AZIWOK figured.
(vi) AZIWOK 500 mg tablet found mention in an article titled "Good news: Drugs in India just got cheaper. List inside" published in the Economic Times on 12 May 2016.
(vii) AZIWOK was one of the medicines enlisted by Wockhardt in its response to a notice inviting tenders issued by M/s. Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd on 15 March 2017.
Thus, submits Mr. Narula, Wockhardt was using the brand name AZIWOK continuously since the time of its registration, and evidence of such use at
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta
Amritdhara Pharmacy, Khoday Distilleries Ltd. v. Scotch Whisky Association
Astrazeneca UK Ltd. v. Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd.
Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd.
Kaviraj Pt Durga Dutt Sharma v. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories
Midas Hygiene Industries (P) Ltd. v. Sudhir Bhatia
Patil Automation (P) Ltd. v. Rakheja Engineers (P) Ltd.
Ramdev Food Products (P) Ltd. v. Arvindbhai Rambhai Patel
Ruston & Hornsby Ltd. v. Zamindara Engg. Co.
Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi
Patil Automation (P) Ltd v. Rakheja Engineers (P) Ltd
Cadila Health Care Ltd v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd
Kaviraj Pt Durga Dutt Sharma v. Navaratna Pharmaceutical Laboratories
Ramdev Food Products (P) Ltd v. Arvindbhai Rambhai Patel
Astrazeneca UK Ltd v. Orchid Chemicals & Pharmaceuticals Ltd
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta
Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Keerthi
Amritdhara Pharmacy, Khoday Distilleries Ltd v. Scotch Whisky Association
Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd
Phonetic similarity between AZIWOK and AZIWAKE creates likelihood of confusion, warranting injunction to prevent trademark infringement.
Pharmaceutical trademarks with shared descriptive suffix deceptively similar if phonetically alike when viewed as wholes; injunction on prima facie possibility of confusion mandatory, applying strict....
[The court established that in cases involving medicinal products, the threshold for proving deceptive similarity is lower due to the potential health risks associated with consumer confusion. The co....
The use of the impugned marks EYESITE/Fig.2 and KL (Label) by the Defendants is likely to cause confusion and deception, thereby constituting infringement of the Plaintiffs' registered trademarks und....
The court found that despite phonetic similarity, the distinctiveness of trade marks and differences in intended consumer bases negate the likelihood of confusion and passing off.
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.
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 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)....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.