The Delhi High Court has dismissed an appeal by RSPL Health Pvt. Ltd., which had alleged that Sun Pharma adopted a deceptively similar trademark ‘PRUEASE’ for its medicinal product, closely resembling RSPL’s menstrual hygiene product mark ‘PRO-EASE’.
The division bench of Justice Navin Chawla and Justice Shalinder Kaur upheld the lower court’s decision, stating:
"There is no dispute that the appellant is using its Subject Mark for goods like sanitary napkins, sanitary towels, pads etc., while the respondents are using their Impugned Mark for medicine claimed to be giving relief against constipation. The two goods are neither allied nor cognate…"
Read also:- J&K High Court Denies Bail to Man Accused of Long-Term Sexual Exploitation Under False Promise of Marriage
RSPL claimed that it had registered its ‘PRO-EASE’ mark in 2012 for products like sanitary napkins and intended to expand into allied goods, including pharmaceuticals. They alleged that Sun Pharma dishonestly used the name ‘PRUEASE’ to confuse customers.
However, Sun Pharma argued that 'PRUEASE' was independently coined from its active ingredient "Prucalopride" and indicated relief from constipation. The company has applied for trademark registration in Class 5 since 2017 and presented sales records and advertisements to support its usage claim.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Steps In to Protect 14-Year-Old Girl from Online Abuse Over 'Moonwalk' Movie Review
The Court emphasized that the nature, consumer base, and trade channels of both product lines were completely different. It referred to the Supreme Court’s decision in Nandhini Deluxe v. Karnataka Coop. Milk Producers Federation Ltd., noting that traders should not be allowed monopoly over unrelated goods under the same trademark class unless they show bona fide intent to trade in those goods.
“There is no likelihood of confusion being caused by the use of the marks for such goods.”
The Court also rejected the argument that RSPL could block Sun Pharma's trademark based on future expansion plans. It said such claims were speculative and that different trademarks are typically used for unrelated products.
Read also:- Kerala High Court Directs Urgent Action for Compensation, Environmental Protection After Another Ship Mishap
Sun Pharma, meanwhile, clarified it had no intention to enter the sanitary napkin segment using the mark ‘PRUEASE’ and had withdrawn earlier oppositions to RSPL’s registrations for such goods.
Based on these findings, the Court ruled:
"There is also no case of passing off made out by the appellant… packaging and depiction of the mark do not indicate any likelihood of confusion."
As a result, the appeal was dismissed, and the request for interim injunction was denied.
