Court finds Zawadi Healthcare's "PANTOZED-40" deceptively similar to Sun Pharma's "PANTOCID," orders halt to further infringement.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has granted an injunction to Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited against Zawadi Healthcare Limited, restraining the latter from using the trademark "PANTOZED-40" for its pharmaceutical products. The court, presided over by Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh, found that Zawadi's mark was phonetically and visually similar to Sun Pharma's registered trademark "PANTOCID," thereby constituting trademark infringement under the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
The decision, delivered on April 1, 2026, came in the wake of Sun Pharma's lawsuit alleging that Zawadi Healthcare's use of "PANTOZED-40" for drugs treating similar ailments was likely to confuse consumers, particularly given the phonetic resemblance between the suffixes "CID" and "ZED." The court emphasized the critical nature of preventing confusion in the pharmaceutical industry, where such errors could have serious health implications.
Sun Pharma had registered "PANTOCID" in 1998, and has since used the mark extensively in India and internationally. The company argued that Zawadi Healthcare's activities, including exporting "PANTOZED-40" from India to Kenya, constituted trademark use under Sections 29(6) and 56 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Zawadi Healthcare contested the claims, arguing that the prefix "PANTO" is common in the industry, derived from the molecule "PANTOPRAZOLE," and thus not exclusive to Sun Pharma. However, the court rejected this defense, noting that Sun Pharma's mark was not solely derived from the molecule but was a unique combination with the ailment it treats, deserving of statutory protection.
The court also dismissed Zawadi's argument regarding the prohibition of international non-proprietary names (INN) under the Trade Marks Act, stating that the prohibition was introduced after Sun Pharma's registration and thus did not affect its validity.
While granting the injunction for trademark infringement, the court did not provide interim relief for Sun Pharma's passing-off claim, as there was no evidence that Zawadi Healthcare had misrepresented its products in a manner that could damage Sun Pharma's goodwill and reputation in India.
This decision underscores the judiciary's role in maintaining the integrity of trademarks, especially in sectors where consumer safety is paramount.
Bottom Line:
Trademark law - Injunction granted for infringement of trademark "PANTOCID" - Defendant's mark "PANTOZED-40" held deceptively similar - Phonetic similarity and likelihood of confusion established.
Statutory provision(s): Sections 13, 29(6), 56, 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999
Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited v. Zawadi Healthcare Limited, (Bombay) : Law Finder Doc id # 2878770
