TABLETS ( INDIA ) LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. T. SATHISH vs M/S. SPEY MEDICALS PRIVATE LIMITED AND THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARKS ( NEW DELHI)

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 31.07.2025 + C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 76/2022 TABLETS ( INDIA ) LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY MR. T. SATHISH .....Appellant versus M/S. SPEY MEDICALS PRIVATE LIMITED & THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARKS (NEW DELHI) .....Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case For the Appellant : Mr. Mayank Bughani, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Radhika Bishwajit Dubey, CGSC with Ms. Gurleen Kaur Waraich, Mr. Kritarth Upadhyay & Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocates for R-2. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J 1. The present Appeal has been filed against the Order dated 22.05.2018 (“Impugned Order”) passed by Respondent No. 2 in Opposition No. MAS- 868102 filed by the Appellant against the Application No. 2466657 bearing Trade Mark “CEOFSPEY” (“Impugned Trade Mark”). FACTUAL BACKGROUND 2. The Appellant claims to be the proprietor of the Trade Mark “CEOF”, bearing Application No. 2206900 in Class 5 in respect of Medical and Pharmaceutical preparations (“Appellant’s Trade Mark”). The Appellant Signature Not Verified C.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 76/2022 Page 1 of 16 Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:01.08.2025 11:27:37 has been using the Appellant’s Trade Mark continuously and uninterruptedly since December 2011. It is submitted by the Appellant that the Appellant’s Trade Mark is exclusive and associated only with the Appellant and has gained substantial popularity and goodwill in the market. The Appellant’s Trade Mark is associated in the market solely with the Appellant. 3. Respondent No. 1 applied for the Impugned Trade Mark under Class 5 in respect of Medicinal and Pharmaceutical preparations on a proposed to be used basis. The Impugned Trade Mark has simply copied the prefix of the Appellant’s