* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 28.03.2026 + CS(COMM) 574/2023, I.A. 15667/2023 & I.A. 19731/2023 SAGA LIFESCIENCES LIMITED .....Plaintiff versus M/S ANAADI GLOBAL CO. & ANR. ....Defendants Advocates who appeared in this case For the Plaintiff : Mr. Vikas Khera, Ms. Sneha Sethia and Mr.

Yash Sharma, Advocates.

For the Defendants : Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay, Mr. Naseen and Mr. Rahul Singh, Advocates for D-1.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA

JUDGMENT

TEJAS KARIA, J I.A. 15667/2025

1. This is an application filed on behalf of the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) seeking interim injunction restraining the Defendants from using the Mark ‘HALESAGA / ’ (“Impugned Mark”) in relation to pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations, and nutraceutical products.

SUBMISSIONSONBEHALFOFTHEPLAINTIFF:

2. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff has advanced the following submissions before this Court:

2.1. The Plaintiff is an Indian pharmaceutical company, which was established in 1981. On 01.05.1981, the Plaintiff, through its predecessor, adopted the Mark ‘SAGA’ (‘Subject Mark’) as part of their trade name and has been continuously using the said Mark in respect of pharmaceutical and medicinal preparations, nutraceutical products, dietetic substances adapted for medical use and cosmetics products.

2.2. The details of the Trade Mark registration / application for the Subject Mark are as under:

S. TRADEMARK DATE OF APPLICATION CLASS STATUS NO. APP. NO.

1 SAGA 14.02.2017 3482073 05 Registered 2 SAGA 23.08.2022 5578564 35 Registered 3 SAGA 18.10.2022 5652305 39 Registered 4 SAGA 19.10.2022 5653579 40 Registered

5 SAGA 08.10.2022 5640376 03 Pending

2.3. The details of the Trade Mark registration / application for the variants of the Subject Mark are as under:

2.4. Furthermore, the Plaintiff also adopted and continues to use other variants of the Subject Mark, including but not limited to ‘SAGAPANTO’, ‘SAGAFO SA’, ‘SAGAFORM’ and ‘SAGASARTAN’.

2.5. Although the products of the Plaintiff are exported outside India, the same amounts to ‘use’ in accordance with Section 56 of the Trade MarksAct, 1999 (“Act”).

2.6. The sales turnover of the Plaintiff’s goods / services under the Subject Mark is Rs. 109,22,42,602 for the year 2021-2022, which shows the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiff in the market.

2.7. The Defendants’ adoption and usage of the Impugned Mark is an attempt to ride on the reputation and goodwill of the Plaintiff. The details of Defendant No. 1’s Trade Mark Applications are as under:

2.8. By virtue of the Impugned Mark, Defendant No. 1 is trying to come close to the Plaintiff’s Subject Mark. Defendant No.1 has put an apostrophe between the words ‘HALE’ and ‘SAGA’ in the Impugned Mark and has used different colour for the word ‘SAGA’ in the Impugned Mark. The word ‘SAGA’ has been given a dominant position in the Impugned Mark. Therefore, it is clear that Defendant No. 1 has done everything to show association with the Plaintiff.

2.9. Defendant No. 1 has copied the Plaintiff's Subject Mark in totality and has merely added the expression ‘HALE’, which is descriptive as per Defendant No. 1’s own submission. The Impugned Mark is used in respect of goods which are similar to the Plaintiff’s goods and the said goods are sold through common trading channels. Therefore, considering the similarity of the rival Marks, goods and the trading channels, confusion amongst the members of the trade and public is inevitable.

2.10. Defendant No. 1 has pleaded that the defendants are only using the Impugned Mark in respect of nutraceuticals, which falls in Class 05, in respect of which the Defendant has no registration. Hence, the registration in Class 03 in the name of Defendant No.1 has no relevance to the present Suit. Without prejudice, the Plaintiff is not seeking any relief in respect of cosmetic goods at this stage.

2.11. The Plaintiff had filed application fo