$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Judgment reserved on: 06.10.2025

Judgment pronounced on: 22.12.2025

+ RFA(COMM) 149/2024

SHRI KIRIT BHADIADRA .....Appellant

Through: Mr. J. Sai Deepak, Sr. Adv. with Ms. Kangan Roda, Mr. Sarthak Sharma, Ms. Apoorva Sharma and Mr. Avinash and Ms.

Purnima Vashishtha, Advs.

versus

WINGS PHARMACEUTICALS

PRIVATE LIMITED .....Respondent

Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Ms. Mahima Chanchalani, Ms. Prashansa Singh, Mr. Rohit Pradhan, Ms. Sunita, Mr. Anmol Bharti and

Ms. Charu Raghav, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE OM PRAKASH SHUKLA

JUDGMENT

% 22.12.2025

OM PRAKASH SHUKLA, J

1. The present appeal has been filed under Section 13 of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, Signature Not Veri 1 f i“eCdPC” hereinafter, 1908 arising from the judgment dated 04.03.2024 passed by the learned District Judge (Commercial Court) -01, West District, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in the matter titled “Wings Pharmaceuticals

Private Limited v. Sh. Kirit Bhadiadra” whereby the aforesaid suit came to be decreed in favour of the plaintiff (arrayed as respondent in the present appeal), holding that the defendant (arrayed as appellant in the present appeal) had infringed the trademark “MEDILICE” and as such directed the defendant to pay a sum of Rs. 10,00,000/- (Ten lakhs only) as punitive damages for the said infringement.

2. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present appeal will be addressed by the same status and name as they were before the learned District Judge. Thus, the “appellant” will be addressed as the “defendant” and the “respondent” as the “plaintiff”.

INTRODUCTION

3. The plaintiff, Wings Pharmaceuticals Private Limited, is a company involved in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products. The defendant is the proprietor of M/s Rapple Healthcare, a company engaged in the business of manufacturing and marketing of ayurvedic medicines and healthcare products.

4. The plaintiff claims to be the registered proprietor of the trademark “MEDILICE”, used in respect of an anti-lice shampoo. On the other hand, the defendant claims to be using the similar mark “MEDILICE LICE KILLER” in relation to its product, an ayurvedic hair oil used for treating lice and dandruff.

5. The plaintiff sought a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using of the mark “MEDILICE” on the grounds of trademark infringement and passing off.

6. The learned District Judge by the impugned judgment dated 04.03.2024 decreed the suit in favour of the plaintiff. Thus, aggrieved by the decision of the learned District Judge, the defendant has filed the present appeal, inter-alia, seeking that the judgment of the learned District Judge in CS (COMM) 208 of 2020 be quashed and set aside.

7. For the sake of convenience, a description of the trade dress and overall representations of both the products/marks have been represented below:

THE PLEADINGS OF THE PARTIES I. THE CAUSE OF THE PLAINTIFF/RESPONDENT

8. The suit was instituted by Wings Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd. (arrayed as Plaintiff No.1), a company established under the provision of Companies Act, 2013 and M/s Wings Biotech, (arrayed as Plaintiff No.2 in trial court), a partnership firm established in the year 2008. The plaintiffs alleged and asserted before the learned District Judge that they had adopted the trademark “MEDILICE” in the year 1998 and used it to sell shampoos containing Permethrin, a medication which is used as a remedy against lice. The plaintiff claimed that the trademark “MEDILICE” is registered under registration no. 2845531 dated

19.11.2014 in Class 3, with the plaintiff as the registered proprietor.

9. The plaintiffs further stated in the plaint that they had also filed an application no. 1022531 dated 02.07.2001 for registration of the trademark “MEDILICE” under Class 5, which was later abandoned by them as it had been incorrectly filed on a “proposed to be used” basis. It was further stated