Delhi HC Bars Use of STAND UP Mark on Sexual Wellness Capsules Over Infringement
Delhi High Court
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has restrained Brahmastra Pharmacy and associated parties from using the mark "STAND UP" and a deceptively similar product label in a trademark and copyright infringement dispute filed by PSTGems Private Limited.
The order was passed by Justice Tushar Rao Gedela on April 30, 2026, in the matter titled PSTGems Private Limited vs Brahmastra Pharmacy & Ors. The court observed prima facie similarities between the rival products and directed the defendants to remove online listings of the allegedly infringing products until further orders.
According to the plaintiff, PSTGems Private Limited is a health tech company engaged in online health consultancy and the sale of nutraceutical and pharmaceutical products, including sexual wellness products marketed under the brand “BRAMPIUM” and its associated trademarks.
The company informed the court that it adopted the trademark “BRAMPIUM” in April 2024 and later introduced products such as “BRAMPIUM-STAND UP.” The plaintiff claimed that the brand had gained substantial market recognition through its website and social media presence, with over one crore website visitors and around three lakh successful product orders.
Also Read:Delhi HC Upholds Ban on Unapproved FDC Drugs, Backs DCGI Action
The plaintiff further contended that the defendants were also selling the allegedly infringing products through online platforms, including Amazon, and that several consumers had contacted the company believing the defendants’ products were associated with PSTGems. On this basis, the plaintiff sought an injunction restraining the defendants from using the mark, label, and associated artwork, along with removal of online listings and disclosure of details relating to the manufacturers and payment accounts involved.
The defendants, represented before the court, opposed the interim injunction and argued that the products sold by the two parties were entirely different in nature. They contended that the defendants’ product was an Ayurvedic proprietary medicine, whereas the plaintiff’s product was a Schedule H drug, thereby reducing the possibility of consumer confusion.
The defendants also argued that the words “STAND UP” were generic and descriptive in nature and incapable of exclusive appropriation by the plaintiff. They submitted that several entities had allegedly been using the phrase “STAND UP” much before the plaintiff adopted it, and therefore the plaintiff could not claim exclusivity over the mark.
The defence further pointed out that the defendants prominently displayed the brand name “BPRK Pharma” on their packaging, whereas the plaintiff prominently used “BRAMPIUM,” making the source of the products distinguishable. The defendants also argued that the retail channels and consumer bases for the products were different, thereby eliminating the possibility of confusion among consumers. Seeking time to file a detailed reply with supporting documents, the defendants urged the court not to grant an interim injunction at this stage.
After hearing both sides and examining the rival products physically produced before the court, the High Court observed that the similarities between the competing labels were substantial and prima facie capable of misleading consumers. The court noted that the mark “STAND UP” appeared identically in the centre of both labels with similar font style, colour scheme, and arrangement. The court also observed that several other design elements, including the presentation of terms such as “desire,” “vitality,” “health with,” and “net quantity,” as well as the box layouts and depiction of two heart symbols, appeared strikingly similar.
Also Read:Bombay HC Grants Relief to Sun Pharma, Restrains OTIDE Mark Over Similarity with OCTRIDE
In its operative directions, the court ordered:
“Accordingly, the defendants are restrained from using the impugned label with the mark ‘STAND UP’ alongwith all other elements and essential features noted above in the label in the same manner as is being used by the plaintiff.”
The court further directed:
“Additionally, the defendants are directed to remove the listings for the impugned goods containing the infringing marks/label from the website https://brahmastrapharmacy.com/product/stand-up-ayurvedic-capsules-for-vitality-stamina-desire-30-capsules/.”
The High Court clarified that the interim order would continue until the injunction application is finally decided. The defendants have been granted four weeks to file their reply, while the matter has been listed for further consideration on September 3, 2026.
To view the official order, click the link below:
