Allowed

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Bhesaja Remedies Private Limited

Bombay HC23 Jul 2025IA/3192/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Trademark infringement and passing off suit over medicinal marks ISUVAZ and OSUVAZ. Finding prima facie phonetic and visual identity, stricter standard for pharmaceuticals, and certified goodwill evidence, the Court granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), restraining the defendant from using OSUVAZ or similar marks.

What did the court decide?

Interim application allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b): defendant restrained from using mark OSUVAZ or deceptively similar marks infringing/passing off ISUVAZ pending disposal of suit.

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. vs Bhesaja Remedies… — Intellectual Property | Bombay HC (2025)

¶1

51 Ia-3192-2025.doc

¶2

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

¶3

INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 3192 OF 2025 IN

¶4

COMMERCIAL IP SUIT NO. 188 OF 2025

¶5

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. ...Plaintiff. Versus Bhesaja Remedies Pvt. Ltd. ...Defendant.

¶6

Mr. Anand Mohan, Mahesh Mahadgut and Kaivalya Shetye for the Plaintiff. Nidhi Bangera, Suresh Poojary i/b Legal House for the Defendant.

¶7

——————

¶8

Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J. Date : July 23, 2025.

¶9

P. C. :

¶10

1. Application has been preferred seeking interim relief in respect

¶11

of the infringement and passing off. By order of even date, the Petition seeking leave under Clause XIV of the Letters Patent (Bombay) came to be allowed.

¶12

2. There is no reply filed by the Defendant to the Interim Application as the submission is that the Defendant is willing to amicably settle the matter, however, without cost

¶13

3. As there is no reply filed, Mr. Mohan learned counsel for the applicant prays for interim relief.

¶14

4. Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the trademark ISUVAZ , which is a medicinal and pharmaceutical preparation used in the

¶15

1 of 4

¶16

Patil-SR

¶17

51 Ia-3192-2025.doc

¶18

treatment of fungus. The Defendant’s mark is OSUVAZ . The plaint pleads that the claim of Defendant is that Defendant’s medical preparation is for the treatment of cholesterol.

¶19

5. Mr. Mohan submits that the Defendant’s mark is phonetically, structurally and visually identical with the Plaintiff’s mark and has in fact subsumed the whole of Plaintiff’s mark by only replacing the vowel “I” with the vowel “O”. He would submit that considering that products are medicinal and pharmaceutical products, the aspect of public interest assumes significance. He would further point out the sales figures and promotional expenses to demonstrate the reputation and goodwill obtained by the Plaintiff. He submits that the Plaintiff applied for the registration of mark in the year 2021 in Class-5 and points out to the registration certificate. He would submit that to the opposition petition which was filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendant mark, a counter statement has been filed in which it is claimed that Defendant’s mark is distinct and therefore it is not even Defendant’s case that the name has been derived from the generic drug.

¶20

6. The Plaintiff’s registration of the mark “ ISUVAZ” is evidenced from the registration certificate placed on record. The Defendant’s mark “ OSUVAZ” which is also a word mark is prima facie phonetically and visually identical to the Plaintiff’s Mark “ ISUVAZ”. The Defendant

¶21

2 of 4

¶22

Patil-SR

¶23

51 Ia-3192-2025.doc

¶24

had subsumed the whole of Plaintiff’s mark and has merely replaced the vowel “I” with the vowel “O” and therefore prima facie deceptive similarity is established.

¶25

7. Mr. Mohan is right in relying upon the counter statement filed by the Defendant to the opposition Application in which it is claimed that the mark is distinctive and is not claimed on the basis of having been appropriated from the generic drug. There cannot be any defence by the Defendant for adopting the same word mark, which has already been registered. There is no material placed on record which would demonstrate that the Defendant had taken any search in the registry before adopting the mark “ OSUVAZ” . The products are used for treatment of different ailments and it is well settled that stricter approach is required to be adopted in case of medicinal preparations.

¶26

8. In order to demonstrate goodwill and reputation, sales figure has been placed on record and also the advertisement expenses which has been duly certified by the chartered accountant.

¶27

9. A strong prima facie case is made out for grant of interim relief. Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (a) and (b), which reads as under:

¶28

“(a) that pending the hearing and final disposal of Suit, the Defendant by itself, its Directors, employees, servants, dealers, franchisees, distributors, stockist, licensees, agents, sister concerns, wholesalers, retailers, representatives, affiliates, associates and/or assigns and

¶29

3 of 4

¶30

Patil-SR

¶31

51 Ia-3192-2025.doc

¶32

all persons acting for and on its behalf be restrained by a temporary order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, soliciting, exporting, displaying, advertising, marketing, promoting and/or in any manner whatsoever using directly or indirectly in relation to any pharmaceutical and/or medicinal preparation and/or such allied and cognate goods the trade mark ‘OSUVAZ’ and/or using any other mark or word being identical with and/or deceptively similar to the Applicant's registered trade mark 'ISUVAZ' and/or using any other trade mark so as to infringe the Applicant's registered trademark 'ISUVAZ' bearing No. 5082122 in any other manner whatsoever;

¶33

(b) that pending the hearing and final disposal of Suit, the Defendant by itself, its Directors, employees, servants, dealers, franchisees, distributors, stockist, licensees, agents, sister concerns, wholesalers, retailers, representatives, affiliates, associates and/or assigns and all persons acting for and on its behalf be restrained by a temporary order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from in any manner manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, stocking, soliciting, exporting, displaying, advertising, marketing, promoting and/or in any manner whatsoever using directly or indirectly in relation to any pharmaceutical and/or medicinal preparation and/or such allied and cognate goods the trade mark 'OSUVAZ' and/or using any other mark or word being identical with and/or deceptively similar to the Applicant's registered trade mark 'ISUVAZ' and/or using any other trade mark so as to pass off the Defendant's goods / products as those of the Applicant's and/or to indicate any connection with the Applicant”.

¶34

[Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

¶35

4 of 4

¶36

Patil-SR

¶37

Signed by: Sachin R. Patil Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 25/07/2025 11:50:19

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Bhesaja Remedies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Glenmark Pharmaceuticals Ltd. v. Bhesaja Remedies Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Didar Baksha Saharul Islam vs Export Import Bank of India and Gol Offshore Limited (in Liquidation)

Oerlikon Textile Gmbh and Co. Kg vs Himson Engineering Private Limited

Ashwin Parekh vs Malaysian Internaitonal Trading Corpn. Sdn and Another

Jehangir Jamshed Guzder vs Cyrus Jamshed Guzder

Manisha Dineshkumar Popat vs Karan Thackeray

Mahesh Shantaram Birwadkar through L. H. vs Mr. Kishor Shankar Patil and Anr.