Delhi High Court, RFA(OS) 138/2013 and W.P.(C) 654/2014, decided on 18 May 2026
In this trademark dispute, the Delhi High Court held that DRL had prior goodwill in the mark “Dr. Reddy’s” and that Reddy Pharmaceuticals’ use of the word “REDDY” for pharmaceutical products amounted to passing off. The Court also upheld the rectification of Reddy Pharmaceuticals’ registration and affirmed reliefs connected with the impugned packaging and domain name. The case is important because it shows that even a common surname can gain protection if it acquires distinctiveness and secondary meaning through long use. It also reflects the stricter approach courts take in pharmaceutical matters, where even a possibility of confusion can have serious consequences. The decision touches key IPR provisions, including Sections 9, 11, 27, 35 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, and Sections 13, 14, 17 and 18 of the Copyright Act, 1957.[1]
Authored by Naga Chandu T.
References:
[1] https://www.livelawbiz.com/pdf_upload/2026/05/19/dr-reddys-674859.pdf