The Department of Pharmaceuticals established the Pradhan Mantri Bhartiya Janaushadhi Pariyojana (PMBJP) with the goal of providing the general people with reasonably priced, high-quality generic medications. It runs over 13,800 “Jan Aushadhi Kendras” throughout India, after becoming well-known for using the term “Jan Aushadhi.”
Facts of The Case
A case was filed in the Delhi District Court by PMBJP against “Jan Aushadhi Sangh,” an organization based in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, using the name “Jan Aushadhi” in conducting business similar to theirs. In the suit, PMBJP alleged that “Jan Aushadhi Sangh” had adopted the name similar to their registered trademark with the intent of misleading the consumers, drawing the benefits of the goodwill of the government initiative.
The Department of Pharmaceuticals alleged that these two names were similar in manner to create confusion and clandestinely benefit from the image built by the PMBJP.
Legal Analysis
The cause of action was essentially based on the laws prevailing with regard to trademarks, primarily the passing off action and infringement of the registered trademark. The principle of passing off is covered under section 27 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 and the relevant section for infringement of a registered trademark is section 29 of the Trademarks Act.
The action of passing off, as broadly covered under section 27, constitutes majorly the following elements:
1. Misrepresentation of the Trademark: The core attribute that constitutes the action of passing off is that the defendant’s trademark is deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s trademark, which further creates confusion in general public’s mind.
2. Similar trade: The defendant should be using the registered trademark in the same class of trade as the plaintiff’s so as to create an image in the consumer’s mind that the product/goods/services are from the plaintiff’s brand only.
In this case, Jan Aushadhi Sangh conveniently adopted the name ‘Jan Aushadhi’ so as to ride off on the goodwill established by the Government by misrepresenting that the medicines being sold by them in that name were the same as the ones being sold by PMBJP.
Section 29 of the Act lays down various grounds of infringement, and the ones relevant to the case is as follows:
1. Similar identity: When a person uses a similar or identical name to a registered trademark which is likely to create confusion amongst consumers, it is said to be infringement under section 29. In this particular case, Jan Aushadhi Sangh very cunningly used the exact same name as the registered trademark but slightly tweaked it by adding one extra word i.e ‘Sangh’ and thus, further created confusion.
2. Unfair advantage in advertising: If the defendant uses the registered trademark to gain an advantage in increasing its revenues by riding off the goodwill of the registered trademark then it constitutes as an infringement of the registered trademark.
Thus, Indian laws prevent the use of marks or names by anyone who might mislead the public into associating the mark with any famous brand. It is in this effort of the PMBJP that the body sought a permanent injunction against Jan Aushadhi Sangh with respect to the use of any branding or trademark involving, in a derogative sense, “Jan Aushadhi.” The legal analysis thus revolved around issues concerning the similarity between the two names, the intention behind them, and very clearly the possibility of confusion amongst consumers as a result of perceived deceptiveness on the part of PMBJP.
Under Indian trademark law, the intention to deceive, particularly with respect to a recognized public initiative, becomes exceedingly vital. The issue before the court was whether or not “Jan Aushadhi Sangh” intended to create confusion in consumer minds that could potentially ruin public trust and goodwill in the Government-run Jan Aushadhi scheme.
Court’s Decision
The Delhi District Court delivered judgment on October 16, 2024, in favor of PMBJP. The court ruled that “Jan Aushadhi Sangh” has indeed adopted the “Jan Aushadhi” name, which was aimed to mislead the public into profiting from the brand recognition built by PMBJP. Therefore, the court passed an order which stated:
1. Permanent Injunction: The court ordered “Jan Aushadhi Sangh” to cease using any branding or name identification similar to “Jan Aushadhi” of whatever description.
2. Damages: The court ordered “Jan Aushadhi Sangh” to pay PMBJP Rs. 10,00,000/- (Indian Rupees Ten Lakhs) in damages as compensation for misadventure and to avoid possible damage to its reputation.
3. Destruction of Infringing Material: All kinds of “Jan Aushadhi” style promotional and operational materials were to be turned over to PMBJP for eventual destruction.
This decision affirms the court’s view to protect the trademarks in the public interest, especially with respect to government-funded programs such as PMBJP which promote critical public health objectives. It reaffirms public faith in the Jan Aushadhi brand, which provides affordable medicines, thus supporting the interests of consumers and PMBJP’s brand identity.
Author: Chelsi Nanda