Hindustan Unilever Limited v. R-3 Organics Limited

GA NO. 1030 OF 2018 / CS NO. 87 OF 2018

The Calcutta High Court granted an interim protective order in favor of Hindustan Unilever Limited (HUL) against R-3 Organics Limited. HUL alleged that the respondent was manufacturing and selling detergent powder under 'PARAS STAIN FIGHTER' with labels deceptively similar to HUL's well-known trademark 'SURF EXCEL.' The court found a prima facie case of infringement regarding both the registered trade mark and the copyright in the distinctive getup and color scheme, leading to an order for inventory and seizure of infringing goods.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Calcutta High Court
Case Number
GA NO. 1030 OF 2018 / CS NO. 87 OF 2018
Judge(s)
Soumen Sen

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Calcutta High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Hindustan Unilever Limited vs R-3 Organics Limited is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patent(T)OP(PT)43/2023

F.Hoffmann-La Roche LtdvsMatrix Laboratories Limited

F.Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd filed a petition seeking revocation of Patent No. 224634, which was granted to Matrix Laboratories Limited. The court noted that the term of Patent No. 224634 had expired on the date of the judgment.

patentCR No.6252 of 2023

Sanjeev Kumar Juneja And AnothervsTerrace Pharmaceuticals Pvt Ltd

The Punjab-Haryana High Court addressed a revision petition concerning a composite trademark infringement and passing off suit. The court held that while joinder of causes of action is permissible under CPC, the delay in trial due to combining both claims necessitated modification. Consequently, the court granted the defendant time to seek rectification of the plaintiff's registered mark, stayed the infringement claim for three months, and directed that the passing off claim be tried as a separate suit.

patent(T)CMA(PT)/75/2023

Nokia Technologies OYvsAssistant Controller of Patents and Designs

Nokia Technologies OY appealed the Assistant Controller's refusal to grant a patent for its system and method for listening to audio content. The appellant argued that the refusal order failed to consider their amended claims and responses to objections raised under Section 3(k).

patentO.S.A.(CAD).Nos.134 to 138 of 2023

ITC LimitedvsBritannia Industries Ltd.

The Madras High Court upheld the interim injunction granted against the defendant for infringing on the plaintiff's trademarks and trade dress related to 'Good Day' biscuits. The court found that the adoption of an identical blue color scheme by the competitor, Sunfeast, amounted to passing off and confusing the public. However, in a concession to the defense, the court permitted the existing stock of the offending product (23.7 tonnes) to be sold.

patentIP-COM/48/2025

IFB Industries LimitedvsMehul Bharatbhai Vavdiya And Others

The Calcutta High Court admitted the plaint in the case of IFB Industries Limited vs Mehul Bharatbhai Vavdiya And Others. The court granted leave under relevant procedural rules, allowing the matter to proceed for scrutiny by the Department.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call