High Court of Bombay

Lupin Limited v. Eris Lifesciences Pvt. Ltd. and Ors.

MANU/MH/3536/2015

23.12.2015

Intellectual Property Rights

Trade mark ruling eases Lupin’s pressure

Bombay High Court granted a motion in favour of Lupin Limited, maker of ‘Nebistar’ line of medicines. It determined Lupin’s registered mark and ‘Nebistol’, manufactured by the Defendants, had “phonetic, visual and structural similarity”. It rejected Defendants’ submission that ‘-star’ and ‘-stol’ were distinct, making the marks themselves dissimilar. The Court reiterated that under the principles of comparison laid down, the question of deceptive similarity would be based on the average intelligence and imperfect recollection of an unwary purchaser. Both marks would have to be looked at in totality, and within the auspices of imperfect pronunciation, arising out of imperfect recollection and other fallibilities of the shpper.

Relevant

Durga Dutta Sharma v. Navaratna Pharma MANU/SC/0197/1964
Amritdhara Pharmacy v. Satya Deo Gupta MANU/SC/0256/1962
Section 11 Trade Marks Act, 1999

Tags : Trade mark divisibility comparison pronunciation

Share :