CHARAK PHARMACEUTICALS INDIA LIMITED Vs. GLENMARK PHARMACETICALS LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order will dispose of the prayer for ad-interim relief pressed on behalf of the plaintiffs during pendency of the Notice of Motion.

(2.) In substance, the plaintiffs' case is that the plaintiffs are the originator of the trade mark "EVANOVA"and have adopted the same for its Medicinal and Pharmaceutical preparation since 1999. It is the plaintiffs case that the plaintiffs have got the trade mark registered bearing No.849756. The plaintiffs are relying on documents to support its claim that the trade mark "EVANOVA" which is a registered trade mark under Class-5 in respect of its Ayurvedic Medicinal preparation, is being manufactured and marketed by the plaintiffs since the time of registration. According to the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs learnt about the illegal activities of the defendants of infringement of the plaintiffs' registered trade mark "EVANOVA" and of passing off their product as that of the plaintiffs product. That came to the plaintiffs notice in or about June 2006. As a result, the plaintiffs gave legal notice to the defendants on 15th September 2006 by registered post. The defendants gave reply to the said legal notice denying the fact that they were indulging in any illegal activity of infringement of plaintiffs' registered trade mark or of passing off.

(3.) According to the defendants, the defendants have independently evolved the trade mark "ECONOVA" in the year 2006 and have applied for registration thereof on 27th February 2006 vide application No.1424608 in Class-5 in respect of Pharmaceutical and Medicinal preparations. It is the case of the defendants that the plaintiffs cannot claim any right in respect of the suffix "NOVA" as "NOVA" means "Novel" or "New". The prefix "ECO" in their trade mark "ECONOVA" makes it completely different from the plaintiffs mark phonetically, aurally and visually. Besides, it is the case of the defendants that their Pharmaceutical product is sold by prescription only, in contrast to the plaintiffs product which is sold across the counter being an OTC product. For such reasons the defendants assert that there is no similarity in the two marks and that the plaintiffs cannot claim any exclusive right over the suffix "NOVA" .