IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Saurabh Banerjee, J.
Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited - Plaintiff
Versus
Kamlesh Kumar Suthar And Ors - Defendants
CS(COMM) 280 of 2025
Decided On : 01-04-2025
(A) Commercial Courts Act, 2015 - Section 12A - Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Section 151 - Exemption from pre-litigation mediation granted to the plaintiff seeking ex parte ad interim injunction - The court followed the Supreme Court's order in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi 2024 (5) SCC 815 and allowed exemption from mediation (Paras 1-2).
(B) Trade Mark Act, 1999 - Permanent injunction and damages sought for infringement, passing off, and unfair trade competition - The plaintiff, a member of the GSK group, has used the trademark ‘CALPOL’ since 1995 and holds valid registrations - The defendants’ mark ‘CAVOL’ was found to be deceptively similar, posing risks to public health (Paras 12-26).
(C) The court emphasized the need for caution in cases involving pharmaceutical products due to potential health risks from consumer confusion (Paras 22-26).
(D) The balance of convenience favored the plaintiff, leading to the grant of an ex parte ad interim injunction against the defendants (Paras 26-27).
Result: Defendants restrained from using the mark ‘CAVOL’ or any similar marks.
ORDER :
I.A. 8278/2025-Exp from pre litigation mediation
1. Vide the present application filed under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (‘CPC’), the plaintiff seeks exemption from pre-litigation mediation.
2. Considering the averments made in the present application, as also since the plaintiff is simultaneously seeking ex parte ad interim injunction, and in view of the order passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi, 2024 (5) SCC 815, which has been followed by a Division Bench this Court in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R.A. Perfumery Works Private Limited, 2022:DHC:4454-DB, the plaintiff is exempted from instituting pre-litigation mediation.
3. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
I.A. 8277/2025-Exp
4. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
5. The application stands disposed of.
I.A. 8276/2025-Additional Documents
6. Vide the present application filed under Order XI Rule 1(4) read with Section 151 of the CPC, the plaintiff seeks leave of this Court to file additional documents.
7. The plaintiff will be at liberty to file additional documents at a later stage, albeit, after initiating appropriate steps, strictly as per the provisions of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 151 of the CPC and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
8. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
I.A. 8279/2025-Permission to file documents in sealed cover
9. Vide the present application filed under Section 151 of the CPC, the plaintiff seeks leave to file confidential documents in a sealed cover.
10. Considering the averments made in the present application, the same is allowed and the plaintiff is granted liberty to approach the Registry for getting the said documents filed in a sealed cover. Upon the plaintiff taking appropriate steps as above, the Registry shall get the documents so filed scanned and added to the electronic file of the present case in a separate folder, which shall be password protected, as per the password provided by the plaintiff.
11. Accordingly, the present application stands disposed of.
12. The plaintiff, by way of the present plaint, seeks permanent injunction and damages for infringement, passing off and unfair trade competition under the Trade Mark Act, 1999 (‘the Act’).
13. Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
14. Upon filing of the process fee, issue summons of the suit to the defendants through all permissible modes, returnable before the learned Joint Registrar on 21.07.2025.
15. Needless to say, it shall be specified in the summons that the written statement(s) shall be filed by each of the defendants within a period of thirty days from the date of the receipt of the summons. Written statement(s) shall be accompanied by affidavit(s) of admission/ denial of documents of the plaintiff, without which the written statement(s) shall not be taken on record.
16. Replication(s) thereto, if any, be filed by the plaintiff within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of written statement(s). The said replication(s), if any, shall also be accompanied by affidavit(s) of admission/ denial of documents filed by the defendants, without which the replication(s) shall not be taken on record within the aforesaid period of fifteen days.
17. If, and when, any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any document(s), the same shall be sought and given within the requisite timelines.
18. List before the learned Joint Registrar for marking exhibits of documents on 21.07.2025. It is made clear that if any party unjustifiably denies any document(s), then such party would be liable to be burdened with costs.
19. List before the Court 11.08.2025.
I.A. 8275/2025-Stay
20. Vide the present application filed under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the CPC, the plaintiff seeks to restrain the defendants, their partners, and/ or any other individuals acting for and on th


The court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction against the defendants for using a deceptively similar trademark, prioritizing public health and safety.
Trademark infringement and passing off established due to deceptive similarity in marks.
The court established that the plaintiff's established goodwill and the likelihood of consumer confusion justified granting an interim injunction against the defendant's use of an identical trademark....
The court granted an injunction against defendants for trademark infringement, emphasizing consumer safety and the risk of confusion caused by similar branding.
Trademark law recognizes the importance of avoiding consumer confusion between similar marks, especially in pharmaceuticals, while encouraging mediation to resolve disputes.
The court affirmed that trademark owners are entitled to an interim injunction against unauthorized similar use that may confuse consumers, prioritizing the prevention of irreparable harm over potent....
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.