Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd. wins a temporary reprieve against Healing Pharma India Pvt. Ltd. over alleged trade dress copying.
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has issued an ad-interim injunction against Healing Pharma India Private Limited, restraining them from using a trade dress that allegedly resembles the one used by Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd. The decision, delivered on August 18, 2026, by Justice A. J. Bhambhani, addresses a critical aspect of intellectual property rights concerning trade dress infringement.
The lawsuit was filed by Himalaya Global Holdings Ltd., which claimed that Healing Pharma's product closely mimicked its own, particularly in terms of name, packaging, and color combination. The court found that such similarities could mislead an ordinary consumer of average intelligence, potentially resulting in confusion between the two brands.
The plaintiffs, represented by Senior Advocate Mr. J. Sai Deepak, successfully argued that the defendants had slavishly copied the artistic elements of their trade dress, which had been extensively used and recognized in the market. The court noted a prima facie case of infringement and determined that the balance of convenience favored the plaintiffs, justifying the need for an interim injunction to prevent irreparable harm.
The court also addressed several procedural aspects of the case. It granted the plaintiffs exemption from pre-litigation mediation, a requirement under Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, citing relevant precedents from both the Supreme Court and the Delhi High Court. Additionally, the court permitted the filing of additional documents and the serving of interrogatories, subject to compliance within specified timelines.
In an effort to explore a potential settlement, the court referred the parties to mediation at the Delhi High Court Mediation & Conciliation Centre. The mediation is to be conducted on a time-bound basis and concluded within three weeks, with further proceedings contingent upon its outcome.
The court's decision underscores the importance of protecting trade dress as a crucial component of a brand's identity and market presence. The case is scheduled for a further hearing on September 30, 2026, pending the results of the mediation process.
Bottom Line :
In a trade dress infringement case, the court held that the similarity in name, packaging, and color combination of the defendant's product to that of the plaintiff's product could mislead an ordinary person of average intelligence and imperfect recollection, thereby justifying a prima facie case for granting an interim injunction.
Statutory provision(s):
- Commercial Courts Act, 2015, Section 12A
- Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XI Rule 1(4)
- Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XI Rule 2
- Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2
