Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh v. Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd.

Bombay HC15 Apr 2025IA/1200/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh and Ors. v. Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd. and Anr.; pharmaceutical marks DULCOFLEX and DULCOLAX; trade mark infringement; copyright in artistic trade dress/packaging; passing off; confirmation of ad-interim relief as interim relief; ex parte confirmation on Defendants' non-appearance despite service; Court Receiver appointed and ad-interim order executed; affidavit of service; leave under clause XIV of the Letters Patent; Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction, Commercial Division; Interim Application allowed.

What did the court decide?

The Interim Application was allowed and the ad-interim relief granted by orders dated 3 August 2023 and 7 January 2025 was confirmed as interim relief. ¶¶29

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh vs Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

69-ia1200.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

IN ITS COMMERCIAL DIVISION

¶4

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1200 OF 2025 IN

¶5

VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR

¶6

Digitally signed by VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2025.11.10 15:00:18 +0530

¶7

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO.265 OF 2025

¶8

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh and Ors. ...Plaintiffs Versus Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd. and Anr. ...Defendants

¶9

Mr. Karan Khiani a/w. Mr. Rohan Lopes i/b. Rashmi Singh, for the Plaintiff. Mr. Deepak Bhalerao, 2^nd Asst. to C.R.

¶10

——————

¶11

CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.

¶12

DATE : NOVEMBER 6, 2025

¶13

P. C. :

¶14

1. By order of 3^rd August, 2023 this Court had granted ad-interim relief for infringement of trade mark, copyright and Court Receiver came to be appointed. Subsequently, ad-interim order was executed by

¶15

the Court Receiver and the Court Receivers Report is placed on record.

¶16

2. At that stage as leave under clause XIV of the Letters Patent was

¶17

not granted, the relief in respect of passing off was not considered. Subsequently, by order dated 5^th December, 2024 leave under clause XIV was granted and on 7^th January, 2025, the ad-interim relief in respect of passing off action was granted.

1 of 3

Vishal Parekar

69-ia1200.doc

3. Learned counsel appearing for the Plaintiff submits that the Defendants have reached out to the Plaintiff for the purpose of settlement, however, the talks could not be fructified. He would further submit that despite Defendants being served, there is no appearance which has been caused on behalf of the Defendants. He submits that as the ad-interim order was duly executed by the Court Receiver, the Defendants are aware of the ad-interim order and despite thereof, they chosen not to cause any appearance. He further submits that the affidavit of service has been placed on record.

¶22

4. By order of 3^rd August, 2023, this Court had come to a prima facie finding that the Plaintiffs are the registered proprietor of the trade mark of DULCOFLEX and DULCOLAX and are the owners of the copyright subsisting in the original artistic trade dress/ packaging work. This Court came to a prima facie finding that the impugned marks are identical with and/or closely deceptively similar to and/or substantial reproduction of the Plaintiff’s trademark/ artistic work/ packaging and is likely to cause confusion and deception in the minds of the consumers. While considering the relief of passing off, this Court has taken into consideration the pleadings of the Plaintiff as regards the annual sales figure and came to a finding of goodwill which is earned by the Plaintiff in respect of the trademark.

¶23

5. Despite the prima facie findings arrived at by this Court as

2 of 3

Vishal Parekar

69-ia1200.doc

regards the infringement of trade mark, copy right and passing off, the Defendants have chosen not to cause any appearance. The prima facie findings arrived at by this Court are therefore not displaced in the absence of any response by the Defendants. There is no reason as to why the ad-interim relief should not be confirmed as interim relief.

¶28

6. Hence, ad-interim relief granted by order dated 3^rd August, 2023 and 7^th January, 2025 is confirmed as interim relief.

¶29

7. The Interim Application is allowed.

¶30

[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶31

3 of 3

¶32

Vishal Parekar

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh v. Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland Gmbh v. Scott-Edil Pharmacia Ltd.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Procter and Gamble Home Products Private Limited vs Malaji Lakaji Maru

Bisleri International Private Limited vs Mahananda Foods Private Limited

Freudenberg Gala Household Product Pvt. Ltd. vs Suresh Kumar a Proprietor of B D Brush Art

Thorat Wine Mart vs Surekha Ravindra Thorat

Sanjay Gopal Puranik vs Abhay Dattatraya Agge

Vijay Govind Patil vs Sneha Dube Pandit Alias Sneha Premnath Dube