Cipla Health Limited v. Amical Healthcare & ANR.
$~133 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 1123/2024 & I.A. Nos. 48738/2024, 48739/2024, 48380/2024 CIPLA HEALTH LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through:
Ms. Archana Sahadeva with Mr. Harshit Bhoi, Advocates.
Email: archana@sahadevalawchambers.com versus AMICAL HEALTHCARE & ANR.
.....Defendants Through:
Mr. Hasmukh Pawar in person (through VC) for defendant no. 1.
Mr. Mitesh Patel in person (through VC) for defendant no. 2.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MINI PUSHKARNA
O R D E R
% 16.12.2024 CS(COMM) 1123/2024 & I.A. Nos. 48378/2024 (for stay), 48379/2024 (Application seeking permission to file copies/dim documents) & 48380/2024 (Application seeking exemption from Pre-Litigation Mediation) 1.
The present suit has been instituted seeking to restrain the defendants from continuing inter alia with acts of infringement of the plaintiff's registered trademark 'CLOCIP', along with passing off its products, marketed under a nearly identical trade mark 'CLOMIC' as that of the plaintiff's 'CLOCIP', copyright infringement on account of adoption and CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 1 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
using a nearly identical trade dress viz.
as that of the plaintiff's 'CLOCIP' product sold under the trade dress 2.
Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that both the products are used for identical purposes and cater to an identical class of customers. A comparison of the competing products, as given in the plaint, is reproduced as under:
CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 2 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
3.
It is the case of the plaintiff that the plaintiff honestly and bonafidely conceived and adopted the unique and highly distinctive trade dress/label/packaging for its CLOCIP antifungal Powder range of products in the year 2021, in the following manner:
4.
It is submitted that products under the trade mark CLOCIP are antifungal products, which are used to treat skin infections. The registrations in favour of the plaintiff, are reproduced as under: 5.
It is submitted that the representatives of the plaintiff came across the defendant's products under the impugned trademark/trade dress in November, 2024. A pictorial representation of the impugned product that the representatives of the plaintiff came across, as given in the plaint, is reproduced as under:
CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 3 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
6.
It is submitted that from a bare perusal of the competing products, it is amply evident that the defendants are attempting to systematically copy the plaintiff's trade mark/trade dress and various distinguishing features of the plaintiff's trade mark/trade dress/product packs/labels. 7.
The table showing the visual description of the distinguishing features that the defendant has attempted to systematically copy from the plaintiff's trade mark/trade dress, as given in the plaint, is reproduced as follows: CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 4 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 5 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 6 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
8.
Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that after advance service of the present plaint, the plaintiff received an email from the defendants, in the following manner:
9.
Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff is CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 7 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
satisfied with the undertaking given by the defendants. 10.
Mr. Hasmukh Pawar, representing the defendant no. 1, appears through Video Conference ("VC") before this Court and confirms the fact of having written an email to the plaintiff. He further submits that he has no objection if the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff. 11.
Similarly, Mr. Mitesh Patel, appearing for defendant no. 2, through VC, also confirms that he shall not manufacture any goods, which would infringe the plaintiff's trademark/trade dress. 12.
The authorisation in favour of Mr. Mitesh Patel by defendant no. 2, is reproduced as under:
13.
Learned counsel appearing for the plaintiff submits that on account of the undertaking given by the defendants, the plaintiff gives up its prayer CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 8 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
towards cost and damages.
14.
Accordingly, with the consent of the parties, the suit is decreed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants in terms of para 58(a), (b), (c) and (d) in the plaint.
15.
In view of the fact that the present suit is being disposed of on the very first day and the plaintiff has accepted the undertaking of the defendants, the Registry of this Court is directed to issue a certificate of refund of full Court fees in favour of the plaintiff. 16.
Decree sheet be drawn up.
17.
The present suit, along with the pending applications, stands disposed of.
MINI PUSHKARNA, J DECEMBER 16, 2024 c CS(COMM) 1123/2024 Page 9 of 9 The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.