Sun Pharma Wins Interim Relief in NAXDOM Trademark Row, Delhi HC Bars Alenvision's NEXADOM Drug
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction in favour of Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare, a subsidiary of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries, restraining Alenvision Pharma and its associate company from manufacturing or marketing their migraine drug under the mark NEXADOM, which the court found deceptively similar to Sun Pharma's registered trademark NAXDOM.
The order was passed by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora on August 28, 2025, in a commercial suit filed by Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare seeking permanent injunction, damages, and appointment of a Local Commissioner to seize infringing stock.
Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare, a subsidiary of Sun Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd., argued that it coined the trademark NAXDOM in 2005, started using it in 2006, and obtained registration in 2007. The drug, combining Naproxen and Domperidone, is prescribed for migraine treatment and is a Schedule H drug. The company submitted evidence of continuous sales and reputation of the mark.
In August 2025, Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare discovered that Alenvision Pharma and its associate were selling migraine tablets under the mark NEXADOM, which contained the same molecule combination and targeted the same ailment. Notably, the defendants’ trademark application for NEXADOM had already been refused by the Trade Marks Registry in September 2023 on the ground of deceptive similarity with NAXDOM.
On behalf of Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare, it was contended that the mark NEXADOM was visually, phonetically, and structurally similar to its long-established brand NAXDOM. Given that both marks were used for pharmaceutical products treating the same condition, the possibility of confusion among doctors, chemists, and patients was very high, which could have serious consequences for public health. Counsel stressed that even small differences in drug names could not be taken lightly in law, as the Supreme Court had earlier cautioned in the Cadila Healthcare case. Sun Pharma also cited its earlier successful enforcement against another similar mark, NAPDOM, to show that its rights over NAXDOM had been judicially recognized.
The defendants, despite being served, did not appear before the court on the date of hearing. Their absence meant that the court proceeded on the basis of Sun Pharma’s pleadings and the documentary record available, including the refusal order of the Trade Marks Registry against their application for NEXADOM.
Justice Arora observed that Sun Pharmaceutical Medicare had established a strong prima facie case in its favor. The court found that the rival marks NAXDOM and NEXADOM were nearly identical and that the defendants’ continued use of NEXADOM even after their trademark application was refused “does not stand to reason.” The judge stressed that, since the dispute related to medicinal products, the test of deceptive similarity had to be applied strictly to avoid confusion among patients and medical professionals.
The court restrained Alenvision Pharma, its directors, stockists, distributors, and agents from manufacturing, selling, or advertising medicines under the mark NEXADOM or any other deceptively similar mark to NAXDOM.
The court held;
"Until the next date of hearing, the defendants, their directors, assignees in business, distributors, dealers, stockists, retailers/chemists, servants and agents or anyone acting on their behalf are restrained from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in medicinal and pharmaceutical preparations under the impugned mark NEXADOM, and/or any other mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's registered trade mark NAXDOM, amounting to infringement of the Plaintiff's registrations referred in Paragraph 11 of the plaint, and/or from passing off their goods as those of the Plaintiff."
In order to secure compliance, the court also appointed Advocate Shivangi Sinha as Local Commissioner, directing her to inspect the defendants’ premises, seize infringing stock and packaging material, and preserve evidence, with police assistance if necessary.
The matter is now scheduled to be heard before the Joint Registrar on October 13, 2025, and before the court on February 24, 2026. The interim injunction will remain in force until further orders.
To view the order, click the link below:
