Courts should be more strict in trademark violation cases of pharma products: Delhi High Court

n its complaint, Mankind Pharma stated that it adopted the trademark 'Caldikind' for calcium and zinc capsules in 2007 and introduced a variant, 'Caldikind-P,' for children in 2017. Mankind became aware of the infringement by Sanshiv Health in September 2024.

The Court performed a comparative analysis of the two products and concluded that Sanshiv Health had willfully adopted and utilized Mankind's trade dress and design.

The Court observed that there is no discernible difference between the trade dress, label, artwork, or trademark of Sanshiv Health's 'CALIKA-P' syrup and that of the plaintiff, Mankind Pharma. Consequently, the potential for consumer confusion is heightened, as both parties are offering similar products through the same distribution channels and targeting the same customer base. Given that these products are pharmaceutical preparations, it is in the public's interest to take proactive measures to restrain the defendants.

The Court further indicated that Sanshiv Health appears to be attempting to leverage the goodwill and reputation of Mankind Pharma's product by appropriating its trade dress and trademark.

The Court stated, "This clearly indicates that the defendants are attempting to closely imitate the plaintiff, as there is no justification for them to adopt the identical trade dress, label, artwork, or trademark for their 'CALIKA-P' syrup unless they intend for the public to believe that their products originate from the plaintiff."

The Court concluded that Mankind Pharma had established a prima facie case warranting the grant of an interim injunction in its favor.

As a result, the Court has prohibited Sanshiv Health from selling, advertising, or engaging in any dealings with the goods and services under the name 'Calika-P' or any other product that is identical or deceptively similar to 'Caldikind' until the next hearing date.