Skip to main content

Delhi High Court exercising its inherent powers passes summary judgment under the Commercial Courts Act in a trademark infringement suit. And in the process paves way for novel evidentiary proof to facilitate justice.

Galderma (Plaintiff) has used the CETAPHIL trade mark internationally since 1950 in relation to a range of skin care products, which were introduced in India in 2001. In addition to this mark, its products bear a unique trade dress with a distinct layout, get up et al. In conjunction, the plaintiff also employs the ‘Ellipses Device’, a very distinctive feature in and of itself.

It filed a suit in the Delhi High Court to restrain the defendant’s use of the mark CETAVEL for skin care products . The mark had been objected to by the Registrar of Trade Marks for its similarity to the plaintiff’s CETAPHIL mark. Moreover, the defendant’s products were sold in a similar packaging and displayed a virtually identical trade dress which even included a reproduction of the ‘Ellipses Device’.

The court was of the view that the plaintiff was entitled to a decree under Order XIII-A of the Commercial Courts, Commercial Division and Commercial Appellate Division of the High Courts Act, 2015. The provision empowers the court to pass a summary judgment, without recording evidence, if it appears that the defendant has no real prospect of defending the claim.

Pictures of third party skin care products submitted by the plaintiff demonstrated their packaging, get up, layout and more were distinct from CETAPHIL, unlike defendant’s bottle and mark. And the court noted that the defendant had not filed a written defence.

It concluded the defendant to have “slavishly imitated the plaintiff’s trade dress which demonstrates its mala fides.” A permanent injunction was granted against the defendant’s illegal use of Galderma’s CETAPHIL trade mark and the distinctive trade dress and elements.

The summary judgment under the Commercial Courts Act is a step in the right direction and demonstrates the Court’s inclination to speedy and expeditious disposal of cases, in particular those where there is no contest.

Galderma S.A. v Velite Healthcare; before the Delhi High Court; summary judgment dated 31.7.2017

Most Recent

News & Insights

VIEW ALL
Thought Leadership
Oct 16, 2025

‘First published on Lexology’ By: Safir Anand and Omesh Puri The Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trade Marks has issued a

Indian Trade Marks Office issues Office Order – Streamlining Registry Function
News & Updates
Oct 16, 2025

Being a part of the International Trademarks Association (INTA) is always a delight. Here’s how Anand and Anand would be joining forces with INTA on

Team Anand and Anand for INTA
Thought Leadership
Oct 14, 2025

‘First published on Lexology’ By: Safir Anand and Arpita Mukherjee When WeWork faced turmoil globally, leading its U.S. parent company to file for

WeWork India’s NSE Listing: A Lesson in Local Execution Within Global Brands
Thought Leadership
Oct 02, 2025

‘First published on India Business Law Journal’ By: Pravin Anand and Dr. Ajai Garg The fourth industrial revolution, driven by artificial intelligence

Independent AI key to India’s global power