Court upholds Sun Pharma’s exclusive rights to the "BEVETEX" trademark, restraining Intas from using the deceptively similar "BEVATAS" for cancer drugs.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has granted a permanent injunction in favor of Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited, effectively restraining Intas Pharmaceuticals Limited from using the trademark "BEVATAS" for its pharmaceutical products. The decision, rendered by Justice Tejas Karia, highlights the critical importance of trademark protection, especially in the pharmaceutical sector where public health is at stake.
The legal battle, initiated by Sun Pharma, revolved around the alleged infringement of their registered trademark "BEVETEX," which has been in use since 1983. Sun Pharma argued that Intas's use of the "BEVATAS" mark, first adopted in 2016, was likely to cause confusion due to the structural and phonetic similarities between the two trademarks.
Sun Pharma, a leading name in the pharmaceutical industry, pointed out that both trademarks are used for drugs treating various forms of cancer, increasing the risk of confusion among consumers. The court underscored the stringent standards applied to pharmaceutical trademarks, recognizing the potential public health implications of such confusion.
Justice Karia's judgment emphasized that even though both products are Schedule-H drugs, necessitating a prescription, the possibility of confusion at the dispensing and purchase stages remains a valid concern. The court noted that consumers, who may not be aware of the chemical components or specific uses of the drugs, could easily mistake one for the other due to the similar sounding trademarks.
Intas Pharmaceuticals defended its use of "BEVATAS," claiming it derived from the active ingredient "Bevacizumab" and the company's name, Intas. However, the court found that Sun Pharma's prior registration and use of "BEVETEX" entitled them to protection under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The judgment also clarified that non-use of a trademark does not serve as a defense in an infringement suit unless rectification proceedings are initiated under Section 47 of the Trade Marks Act. Furthermore, the court dismissed claims of delay and acquiescence, noting Sun Pharma's timely opposition to Intas's trademark registration and subsequent legal action.
In conclusion, the court ruled in favor of Sun Pharma, granting a permanent injunction against Intas, thereby safeguarding the "BEVETEX" trademark and reinforcing the need for rigorous trademark protection in the pharmaceutical industry to prevent potential public health risks.
Bottom Line:
Trade Mark Law - Plaintiff entitled to permanent injunction against the use of deceptively similar marks for pharmaceutical drugs. Structural and phonetic similarity, likelihood of confusion, and public health considerations were pivotal in granting relief to the Plaintiff.
Statutory provision(s):
Trade Marks Act, 1999 Sections 28, 29, 135, 47
