Zydus Wellness Products Limited v. M/S Arihant Remedies & Anr.

CS(COMM) 417/2019

The Delhi High Court confirmed the existing ad-interim injunction in favor of Zydus Wellness Products Limited against M/S Arihant Remedies & Anr. The court found that the defendant's product was prima facie deceptively similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark and trade dress, despite arguments regarding ownership transfer and territorial jurisdiction. This ruling reinforces the protection afforded to established brands through both trademark law and passing off principles.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Delhi High Court - Orders
Case Number
CS(COMM) 417/2019
Judge(s)
Navin Chawla

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 Zydus Wellness Products Limited vs M/S Arihant Remedies & Anr. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentCS(COMM) 469/2023

Grip Invest Technologies Private LimitedvsAshok Kumar & Ors.

The Delhi High Court granted an interim injunction in favor of Grip Invest Technologies, restraining a newly discovered mirroring website (eliteedgebrokerage.info) from operating. The court found that the new site was an exact copy of the plaintiff's website, infringing both copyright and trademark. Furthermore, the court directed the Domain Name Registrar and the Department of Telecommunication to take immediate steps to block access to the infringing domain, reinforcing proactive measures against online IP infringement.

patentFAO(OS)(COMM) Nos. 22&23/2023

Shamrock Geoscience Ltd & Anr.vsTimab NL B.V. / Kaba Infratech Pvt Ltd

In a significant settlement, the Delhi High Court accepted assurances from Shamrock Geoscience Ltd. that they would cease using the disputed mark 'GeoCrete,' replacing it with 'Alpave.' The company agreed to withdraw its existing trademark registration (TM No.3392787) and all related pending applications within four weeks. This resolution effectively settled the core trademark dispute between Shamrock Geoscience and Timab NL B.V./Kaba Infratech, allowing both parties to move forward while leaving technical know-how claims open for separate litigation.

patentCS (OS) 985/2012

M/S Parimal MandirvsBharat Vasi Sugandhit Dhoop & Ors

The Delhi High Court ruled in favor of M/S Parimal Mandir, a leading manufacturer of incense sticks, finding that the defendants were engaging in passing off and intellectual property infringement. The court found that the defendants' use of deceptively similar trade dress, packaging, and branding for their Dhoop products created an overall visual impression likely to mislead consumers into believing the goods originated from the plaintiff. Consequently, a decree was passed granting permanent injunctions against the defendants and ordering the destruction of infringing materials.

patentWRIT PETITION No.14945/2020 (GM-RES)

M/S Sami -Sabinsa Group LimitedvsUnion Of India

M/S Sami-Sabinsa Group Limited filed a writ petition seeking an interim order to stay the execution of a notice and requesting that respondents refrain from opposing their pending patent applications. The court subsequently granted leave for the petitioners to withdraw the petition.

patentC.O.(COMM.IPD-CR) 761/2022

Sweeton Foods Pvt LtdvsM/S Grv Conferectionery And Foods

Sweeton Foods Pvt Ltd filed a petition seeking the cancellation of a copyright held by M/S Grv Conferectionery And Foods for the label 'KARTIER GOLD 24 CARAT SWISS MILK CHOCO'. This action stemmed from an earlier civil suit regarding trademark infringement. The court found that since the respondent had undertaken in a settlement decree to withdraw and cancel the registration, the petition was allowed.

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