Delhi HC Restrains Antex Pharma from Using FULLHAIR, UDIS Brands Allegedly Similar to Nava Healthcare's HAIRFUL, UDIVIN Marks

According to Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., the defendants' products are sold through the same trade channels to the same class of consumers, creating an inevitable likelihood of confusion. It further asserted that it had invested substantially in building goodwill and reputation through continuous and extensive use of its trademarks, as reflected in its sales figures. Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. also claimed copyright protection over the three-arrow artistic work and alleged that the defendants deliberately imitated the design and colour scheme to ride upon its goodwill and mislead consumers into believing that the defendants' products were associated with or originated from Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. emphasized that because the competing goods are pharmaceutical products, even a minor degree of confusion could endanger public health and therefore warranted immediate judicial intervention.

After examining the pleadings, documents, rival trademarks and competing trade dresses, the Court held that Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. had established a prima facie case for grant of an ex parte ad interim injunction. The Court observed that the balance of convenience favoured Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. and that refusal of interim protection would result in irreparable harm to its business and reputation.

The Court noted that Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. is the prior adopter and registered proprietor of the HAIRFUL and UDIVIN trademarks and has continuously used them for pharmaceutical products. It further observed that Antex Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and the other defendant had adopted FULLHAIR and UDIS, which appeared deceptively similar to Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.'s registered marks, for identical or similar goods. Since both parties operate in the same trade channels and cater to common consumers, the likelihood of confusion was considered significant, amounting prima facie to trademark infringement.

The Court also found that Antex Pharma Pvt. Ltd. and the other defendant had allegedly copied Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.'s distinctive green-and-white trade dress, packaging and the copyrighted three-arrow artistic device. It observed that such imitation appeared intended to exploit Nava Healthcare Pvt. Ltd.'s goodwill and create an impression of commercial association between the parties. Stressing the special nature of pharmaceutical products, the Court relied upon the Supreme Court's decision in Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. and reiterated that confusion in medicinal products must be assessed more strictly because "Drugs are poisons, not sweets. Confusion between medicinal products may, therefore, be life threatening, not merely inconvenient." The Court observed that the threshold for determining deceptive similarity in pharmaceutical products is necessarily lower owing to the potential risk to public health.

Granting interim relief, the Court ordered:

To view the official order, click the link below: