Delhi High Court Restrains Rebanta Healthcare From Using Dr. Reddy's Registered Trademark 'REBAHEAL'

Delhi High Court Restrains Rebanta Healthcare From Using Dr. Reddy's Registered Trademark 'REBAHEAL'

Justice Mini Pushkarna of the Delhi High Court has ruled that the use of visually and phonetically identical marks for medicines could lead to public confusion, particularly when the products serve different medical purposes.

A permanent injunction was issued against Rebanta Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. for using the Trademark 'REBAHEAL,' which belongs to Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. Both Rebanta and Dr. Reddy's are pharmaceutical companies producing a wide range of medicinal products.

Dr. Reddy's Laboratories Ltd. (Dr. Reddy's) launched a medicine named 'REBAHEAL' for treating peptic and mouth ulcers and registered the name as a trademark. Subsequently, Rebanta Healthcare Pvt. Ltd. (Rebanta) began selling a product under the same name. However, Rebanta's product was for different ailments and compositions, intended to treat pain, regulate menstruation, and aid in bone fractures.

Dr. Reddy's filed a suit for a permanent injunction before the Delhi High Court (High Court) to restrain Rebanta from violating and infringing its trademark. Dr. Reddy's argued that the use of an identical mark by Rebanta could have disastrous consequences if confused with the original 'REBAHEAL' medicine, as both products were intended for separate medical purposes. Furthermore, Dr. Reddy's contended that Rebanta's use of a similar mark was intended to infringe on Dr. Reddy's statutory rights and mislead consumers.

Rebanta did not appear before the High Court and was therefore proceeded against ex-parte.

The High Court observed that Dr. Reddy's had established a prima facie case for granting interim relief in its favor. The court noted that Dr. Reddy's was likely to suffer irreparable loss and damage to its goodwill and reputation if relief was not granted. The balance of convenience also lay in favor of Dr. Reddy's.

The High Court held that the rival marks ‘REBAHEAL’ were visually and phonetically identical, which would likely cause confusion and deception among the general public, doctors, and chemists. Moreover, the court noted that the rival products were intended for different ailments, which could lead to serious health implications if patients mistakenly took the wrong medicine due to confusion.

The High Court also highlighted that the classes of consumers for both parties directly overlapped. Both parties used the name ‘REBAHEAL’ for different purposes, which could seriously injure public health. The general public might believe that Rebanta's infringing product was the same as Dr. Reddy's product due to the identical names.

Therefore, the High Court directed Rebanta and all persons acting on its behalf to refrain from manufacturing, marketing, supplying, selling, and offering for sale, including online, or advertising, directly or indirectly, any medicinal, ayurvedic, or pharmaceutical preparations under the impugned trademark ‘REBAHEAL’ or any other mark deceptively similar to Dr. Reddy's trademark ‘REBAHEAL.’