GLAXOSMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LIMITED vs ZEE LABORATORIES LIMITED

Judgment text excerpt

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment delivered on: 28/02/2026 + CS(COMM) 896/2025 GLAXOSMITHKLINE PHARMACEUTICALS LTD. .....Plaintiff versus ZEE LABORATORIES LIMITED. ....Defendant Advocates who appeared in this case For the Plaintiff : Ms. Tanya Varma, Mr. Vardaan Anand, Ms. Ruchika Yadav and Ms. Hansika Bajaj, Advocates. For the Defendant : Mr. Rohit Bohra and Mr. Siddharth Bambha, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TEJAS KARIA JUDGMENT TEJAS KARIA, J I.A. No. 20991/2025 1. This is an Application filed by the Plaintiff under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) restraining infringement of the Trade Mark, ‘PHEXIN’ (“Plaintiff’s Mark”), passing off, unfair competition, dilution etc. 2. The Defendant is using the Marks, ‘FEXIN’, ‘FEXIN-F’, ‘FEXIT’, ‘FEXIT-B’ and ‘FEXIT-M’ for sale of pharmaceutical ointments. Signature Not Verified CS(COMM) 896/2025 Page 1 of 16 Signed By:NEELAM SHARMA Signing Date:28.02.2026 14:57:20 3. On 03.09.2025, the learned Counsel for the Defendant, on instructions, furnished an oral statement before this Court that the Defendant will discontinue the use of the Mark ‘FEXIN’ forthwith. The statement of the Defendant was taken on record and the Defendant was made bound to the statement. 4. The Defendant was, however, opposed the injunction against the use of the Marks, ‘FEXIT’, ‘FEXIT-B’ and ‘FEXIT-M’ (“Impugned Marks”) and, accordingly, the Parties have been heard with respect to grant of interim injunction against the use of the Impugned Marks by the Defendant. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF: 5. The learned Counsel for the Plaintiff made the following submissions: 5.1. The Plaintiff is a member of the GlaxoSmithKline (“GSK”) group of companies, of which GSK Pharmaceuticals Limited is the pa