AJANTA PHARMA LTD. Vs. THEON PHARMACEUTICALS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an application for interim relief in a pharmaceutical trade mark and passing off action. In the time since this lawsuit was first filed, its contours have changed quite significantly. The Plaintiff ("Ajanta") brought suit claiming protection over its mark FERANTA, used for L-Methyfolate Calcium, Pyridoxal 5'- Phosphate, Methylcobalamin, Ferrous Ascorbate and Zinc Sulphate pharmaceutical tablets. Ajanta said the mark then used by the 2nd Defendant ("Intas"), FERINTA, constituted infringement and passing off. I first granted an ex parte injunction on 11th August 2016. On 1st September 2016, Intas agreed to discontinue using FERINTA. It said it would, instead, use the mark INTAS' FERINTAS. I allowed these two words to be used in any combination, or with some suitable additional word sufficient to sufficient that FERINTAS was by or came from Intas. Since then, Intas has been using its mark in that manner: INTAS' set above the word FERINTAS, with FER in black, and the rest in a rust red colour. FERINTAS is set in an oval or lozenge shaped device.

(2.) Later, Mr Kane for Ajanta said his instructions were to contest even this use as being impermissible. I then heard Mr Kane Ajanta, Mr Dhond for Intas and Mr Kirpekar for the 1st Defendant, which manufactures products for Intas.

(3.) Though both sides have cited a great deal of authority, and which I propose to consider later in this judgment, it seems to me that shorn of all the usual jousting we see in court, the case turns on a very narrow factual determinant. The contest is now, as I have just said, not between FERANTA and FERINTA. That might indeed have been too close to call. The contest is now between FERANTA and INTAS' FERINTAS; or, visually, between this: .. and this: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_153_LAWS(BOM)5_2017_1.jpg</IMG> <IMG>JUDGEMENT_153_LAWS(BOM)5_2017_2.jpg</IMG>