A Case Of Triple Identity Where Marks, Product Category & Trade Channel Are Identical: Delhi High Court Grants Interim Injunction To Mankind Pharma In Trademark Case

The Delhi High Court has granted interim injunction to the pharmaceutical company Mankind Pharma Limited against Biodiscovery Lifesciences Private Limited, in a trademark dispute.

A Suit was filed before the Court, seeking permanent injunction restraining infringement of the registered Trade Mark, ‘MANKIND’, ‘KIND’, ‘FENDIKIND’, ‘ZENKIND’ and ‘DIZIKIND’ along with other ancillary reliefs.

A Single Bench of Justice Tejas Karia observed, “This is a case of triple identity where the Marks are identical, the product category is identical and the trade channel as also the consumer base is identical. The Plaintiff being the prior user, adopter of the Plaintiff’s Trade Marks is entitled to protection. The identity in the Impugned Marks is so close to the Plaintiff’s Trade Marks that the two are indistinguishable. The infringing activities of the Defendant is likely to cause confusion in the course of trade of the Plaintiff leading to erosion of consumers’ trust.”

The Bench said that the Defendants’ use of the impugned marks is prima facie dishonest and nothing but an attempt to ride the goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff’s mark so as to cause confusion in the market.

Advocate Ankur Sangal appeared on behalf of the Plaintiff.

Factual Background

The Plaintiff-Mankind Pharma has been engaged in the manufacturing and supply of medicinal, pharmaceutical, consumer healthcare, and wellness products across India and globally. The products and services of the Plaintiff under its trademarks acquired goodwill and reputation in India and all over the world, and its trademarks ‘MANKIND’/‘KIND’ have also been declared as a well-known Trade Mark by the Registrar of Trade Marks under Rule 124 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017.

In August 2025, the Plaintiff came across the Defendant’s product under the trademark ‘FENKIND’ on its website. While browsing its website, the Plaintiff came across other products of the Defendant with its trademarks. Hence, the Plaintiff filed a suit before the High Court, challenging the impugned marks i.e., ‘DICKIND’, ‘LONOKIND’, ‘FENKIND’ and ‘CHIMOKIND’.

Reasoning

The High Court in the above context of the case, noted, “Having considered the pleadings, documents and submissions, the Plaintiffis the registered proprietor of the Plaintiff’s Mark, with the earliest registration for the Plaintiff’s Trade Mark was in the year 1995. The Plaintiff has been able to establish long and continuous use of the Plaintiff’s Trade Mark. The Plaintiff has demonstrated the goodwill and reputation acquired by the Plaintiff’s Trade Mark.”

The Court added that the Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for grant of an ex-parte ad-interim injunction and balance of convenience is in favour of the Plaintiff and against the Defendant.

“Irreparable injury would be caused to the Plaintiff if an ex-parte ad-interim injunction is not granted”, it said.

The Court, therefore, restrained the Defendant, its directors, assignees in business, its associates, affiliates, franchisees, licensees, distributors, dealers, stockists, retailers, agents, and all others acting for or on its behalf, from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, directly or indirectly dealing in medicinal, pharmaceutical, consumer healthcare and wellness products under the impugned marks or any other Trade Mark/Label that may be identical/deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s Trade Marks, amounting to infringement and/or passing off of the Plaintiff’s Trade Marks.

Accordingly, the High Court granted interim injunction to the Plaintiff, restrained the Defendant, and listed the case on January 28, 2026.

Cause Title- Mankind Pharma Limited v. Biodiscovery Lifesciences Private Limited (Case Number: CS(COMM)1016/2025)

Appearance:

Advocates Ankur Sangal, Ankit Arvind, Nidhi Pathak, and Rishab Rao.

Click here to read/download the Order