Mankind Pharma Limited v. Morepen Laboratories Limited

CS(COMM) 747/2024 & I.A. Nos. 38001/2024, 38002/2024 & 38003/2024

The Delhi High Court addressed several procedural applications in the trademark and copyright infringement suit filed by Mankind Pharma against Morepen Laboratories. The court granted exemptions regarding document filing and pre-institution mediation, while proceeding with the main injunction application (I.A. 38001/2024). The plaintiff alleged dishonest adoption of their registered trade dress and copyright for a pregnancy detection strip, leading to claims of infringement and passing off. The defendant countered by arguing that the plaintiff approached the court belatedly.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
CS(COMM) 747/2024 & I.A. Nos. 38001/2024, 38002/2024 & 38003/2024
Decision Date
2 September 2024

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before Delhi High Court - Orders. Understanding the court's reasoning in Mankind Pharma Limited vs Morepen Laboratories Limited is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentCS(COMM) 505/2022

Vifor (International) Ltd.vsEris Lifesciences Limited

The plaintiffs sought interim directions based on a prior Division Bench order. The court noted that a Coordinate Bench had dismissed the plaintiffs' interim injunction applications concerning patent IN 221536. Consequently, the status quo orders previously passed were vacated, subject to conditions preventing defendants from following the patented process.

patentC.S. No.682 of 2016

Bharathi Consumer Care Products Pvt.Ltd.vsSanku Soap Works

Bharathi Consumer Care Products filed a suit against Sanku Soap Works alleging multiple infringements. The plaintiff claimed violations related to the deceptively similar use of their registered trademark 'SILVER FOAM XXX' and copyright in its artistic label/trade dress, as well as passing off. The initial prayers sought permanent injunctions and damages.

patent(T)CMA(TM)/1/2023 (OA/104/04/TM/CHN)

M/s.Ghanshyam Perfumery And Co.vsS.Shri Kasim Ramaiah

This Madras High Court case involved a Trade Marks Appeal challenging the rejection of an opposition against Trademark Application No. 582422. The parties, M/s. Ghanshyam Perfumery And Co. and S.Shri Kasim Ramaiah (trading as M/s. Shanker Perfumery Works), reached a comprehensive settlement agreement. Under the terms, they agreed to exclusive rights for 'SONA CHANDI' and other 'SONA formative trademarks,' respectively, while also agreeing not to use deceptively similar labels. The court disposed of the appeal based on these mutual consent terms.

patentC.S.(Comm)No.113 of 2021

V.K.R.VenkatesanvsV. Mahendran

This case involved a dispute over trademark and copyright infringement concerning 'VKR SIVAJI BRAND' used on rice products. The plaintiff filed a suit seeking permanent injunctions against the defendant for using deceptively similar marks and artistic works. However, despite multiple opportunities and court directions to file necessary affidavits and proceed with evidence, the plaintiff repeatedly failed to comply with the case management schedule. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the suit for default.

patentC.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT) 137/2022

Janssen Schiences Ireland UcvsController Of Patents

Janssen Schiences Ireland Uc appealed the refusal of a patent application for 'Prevention of HIV- Infection with TMC278' by the Deputy Controller of Patents. The appeal challenged the grounds of lack of inventive step and non-patentability due to mere admixture. However, the appellant subsequently decided to withdraw the present appeal.

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