Delhi High Court Stays Registration Of Mark Found Similar To Dabur's Pudin Hara
The Delhi High Court has stayed the opertaion of trademark registration for “Wellford Pudin Hara,” holding that its adoption appears prima facie dishonest and likely to confuse consumers familiar with Dabur's digestive remedy “Pudin Hara".
Pudin Hara is a popular mint based over-the-counter herbal product used for indigestion and stomach discomfort.
The court said the impugned mark “completely subsumes” Dabur's mark for goods in the same class, creating “an irrefutable and real likelihood of confusion.” It also restrained Wellford Pharmaceuticals Private Limited from transferring or creating third-party rights in the registration.
A single bench of Justice Tejas Karia passed the order on December 9, noting that the stay will operate until March 17, 2026, while hearing Dabur's petition seeking removal of the mark under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act.
Dabur, incorporated in 1884, told the Court it adopted the “Pudin Hara” mark in 1930 for Ayurvedic, medicinal, pharmaceutical and digestive care products and has used it continuously since then. Its first trademark application for “Pudin Hara” was filed in 1979 with a user claim since 1930, and the registration remains valid until 2027.
The company said its decades of uninterrupted use had made “Pudin Hara” widely known among consumers, placing on record sales data and advertising expenditure to demonstrate goodwill.
Dabur submitted that a trademark search revealed Wellford Pharmaceuticals had secured registration for “Wellford Pudin Hara” on a proposed-to-be-used basis for pharmaceutical goods. It argued that the adoption was dishonest and calculated to mislead consumers into assuming a connection with its long-standing digestive product.
After reviewing the material, the court held that Dabur had established prior adoption, continuous use and observed that Wellford's conduct “prima facie appears to be with mala fide intent to capitalize on the Petitioner's established goodwill and reputation.”
Allowing the registration to continue during the proceedings, the court warned, would cause “grave prejudice” to Dabur.
Finding the registration prima facie violative of the Trade Marks Act and noting that the balance of convenience and risk of irreparable harm favoured Dabur, the court stayed the registration and listed the matter for March 17, 2026.
Case Title: Dabur India Limited v. Wellford Pharmaceutical Private Limited & Anr.
Case Number: C.O. (COMM.IPD-TM) 271/2025
For Petitioner: Advocates Kripa Pandit, Christopher Thomas and Visheshta Kalra
For Respondents: Advocates Nidhi Raman, CGSC, Arnav Mittal and Om Ram