Bombay High Court Grants Ex-Parte Relief To Hindustan Unilever In John Doe Action Over Counterfeit Close-Up And Pepsodent Products
The Court noted that a strong prima facie case had been made out by Hindustan Unilever as the impugned goods were found openly sold in Indore and Ranchi, and the genuine products manufactured in Nepal were being illegally brought into India and mixed with counterfeits.
The Bombay High Court granted ex-parte ad-interim reliefs to Hindustan Unilever in a John Doe action, restraining unknown defendants from manufacturing, marketing, selling, or distributing counterfeit and contraband Close-Up and Pepsodent products.
A Single Bench of Justice Manish Pitale observed, “The applicants have clearly made out a case for grant of ex- parte ad-interim reliefs, inter alia, for appointment of Court Receiver. Peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case require an additional direction to the Court Receiver to prepare separate inventories for the counterfeit products on the one hand and the contraband products on the other. Since the investigation team of the applicants has come across such products being sold openly at various places, including pavements in the markets of Indore and Ranchi, a strong case is made out by the applicants in their favour to pray for a direction that the impugned products be permitted to be brought to the premises of the applicants, to be kept in a sealed condition for future reference.”
The Court added, “This Court is of the opinion that unless the ad-interim reliefs prayed by the applicants without notice are granted, they will continue to suffer grave and irreparable loss and that therefore, the balance of convenience is also in their favour.”
Hindustan Unilever was represented by Advocate Hiren Kamod.
Brief Facts
It was alleged that in the first week of March 2025, Hindustan Unilever (HUL), Plaintiff No.2 herein, through an investigation in the markets of Indore and Ranchi, came across two kinds of impugned products, absolute counterfeit products and contraband goods allegedly imported from Nepal to be mixed with counterfeits and sold across India, violating its intellectual property rights. HUL pointed out that the copying was to such an extent that the counterfeit products appeared genuine, with errors such as the misspelling of “Nepal” as “Napal” and other differences detailed in the annexed report.
HUL submitted that they had a manufacturing facility in Nepal for producing genuine toothpastes bearing the registered trademarks CLOSEUP and PEPSODENT for sale in Nepal, and their investigation team found that the Defendants were mixing these genuine Nepal-manufactured products, illegally brought into India, with counterfeit products for sale in the markets.
HUL, asserting their intellectual property rights in their registered trade marks CLOSEUP, PEPSODENT, HUL, HINDUSTAN UNILEVER and U-LOGO, as also the original artistic works/trade dress associated with their registered marks CLOSEUP and PEPSODENT, in which the plaintiffs claim subsisting copyright, approached the High Court seeking ex-parte ad-interim relief before the High Court as a John Doe action.
Reasoning of the Court
The Court noted that there existed sufficient material on record on behalf of HUL to show that the impugned products found in the markets at Indore and Ranchi were nothing but counterfeit products and that they were entitled to press for urgent ex-parte ad-interim reliefs without notice.
The Court observed that HUL had made out a clear case for ex-parte ad-interim reliefs, including appointment of Court Receiver with directions to prepare separate inventories for counterfeit and contraband products. It further added, “Since the investigation team of the applicants has come across such products being sold openly at various places, including pavements in the markets of Indore and Ranchi, a strong case is made out by the applicants in their favour to pray for a direction that the impugned products be permitted to be brought to the premises of the applicants, to be kept in a sealed condition for future reference.”
The Bench observed, “This Court is of the opinion that unless the ad-interim reliefs prayed by the applicants without notice are granted, they will continue to suffer grave and irreparable loss and that therefore, the balance of convenience is also in their favour.”
Consequently, the Court granted HUL ex-parte ad-interim relief restraining the Defendants from manufacturing, trading, marketing, importing, distributing, selling, or using in any manner whatsoever dentifrices, including toothpaste, tooth powder, mouthwashes, dental cream, and all oral hygiene products, bearing the impugned artistic works of CLOSEUP and PEPSODENT.
Further, the Court appointed a Court Receiver and Additional Special Receivers to search all premises of the Defendants, seize and take custody of all impugned products, infringing marks, drawings, copies, materials, and products manufactured by the Defendants, with a direction to prepare an inventory of all such material and equipment.
Cause Title: Unilever Global IP Limited & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar (Interim Application (L) No. 8904 of 2025)
Appearance:
Plaintiffs: Advocates Hiren Kamod, Laher Shah, Jayesh Kalebere
