Delhi High Court Permanently Restrains Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturers From Using LOOZOUT Trademark, Imposes Rs. 2 Lakhs Cost

Nupur Thapliyal

24 Jun 2022 7:15 AM GMT

  • Delhi High Court Permanently Restrains Pharmaceutical Products Manufacturers From Using LOOZOUT Trademark, Imposes Rs. 2 Lakhs Cost

    The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained two manufacturers of the pharmaceutical products from manufacturing, selling, advertising and promoting the products using the trademark 'LOOZOUT', which was deceptively similar to the registered trademark 'LOOZ'. Justice Jyoti Singh also restrained the manufacturers from manufacturing and selling products under any other mark which was identical...

    The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained two manufacturers of the pharmaceutical products from manufacturing, selling, advertising and promoting the products using the trademark 'LOOZOUT', which was deceptively similar to the registered trademark 'LOOZ'. 

    Justice Jyoti Singh also restrained the manufacturers from manufacturing and selling products under any other mark which was identical or deceptively similar to 'LOOZ' or its variants so as to amount to infringement or passing off.

    The suit was filed by Intas Pharmaceuticals Private Limited regarding trademark infringement by three defendants. While the suit was settled qua defendant no. 1, there was no appearance on behalf of the two manufacturers, who were defendant no. 2 and 3.

    "Defendants No. 2 and 3 have chosen to stay away from the proceedings, despite service and thus there is no justification or reasonable explanation to adopt the infringing mark on the products manufactured by them," the Court noted.

    The suit was accordingly decreed against the said manufacturers, Defendants No. 2 and 3, with costs of Rs. 2,00,000.

    "Since the suit has been settled qua Defendant No.1 at an early stage of litigation, Plaintiff is entitled to refund of 50% of the Court Fees deposited by it, in accordance with provisions of Section 16A of the Court Fees Act, 1870 read with Section 89 CPC, 1908," the Court added.

    The suit was accordingly disposed of.

    Case Title: INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS PRIVATE LIMITED v. INTRA LIFE PRIVATE LIMITED & ORS.

    Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 590

    Click Here To Read Order


    Next Story