- Home
- /
- High Courts
- /
- Delhi High Court
- /
- Mankind Pharma Entitled To Higher...
Mankind Pharma Entitled To Higher Protection Over "Kind" Family Marks: Delhi High Court Orders Removal Of 'Unkind' Trademark
Nupur Thapliyal
23 Aug 2025 4:25 PM IST
The Delhi High Court has held that pharmaceutical company Mankind Pharma Limited is entitled to higher protection for “Kind” family marks, while ordering removal of “Unkind” mark from the Register of Trademarks. Justice Tejas Karia observed that merely changing the first part of the Impugned Trade Mark and using the “distinguishing family name or characteristic” is likely to...
The Delhi High Court has held that pharmaceutical company Mankind Pharma Limited is entitled to higher protection for “Kind” family marks, while ordering removal of “Unkind” mark from the Register of Trademarks.
Justice Tejas Karia observed that merely changing the first part of the Impugned Trade Mark and using the “distinguishing family name or characteristic” is likely to cause confusion in the market.
“Although the word 'KIND' is not related to the pharmaceutical products being sold by the Petitioner, but due to its continuous and extensive usage, the said mark has come to be exclusively associated with the Petitioner, and this would entitle the Petitioner to a higher protection for the KIND Family of Marks,” the Court said.
Justice Karia was dealing with Mankind Pharma's plea seeking rectification of the Register of Trade Marks by cancellation or removal of the Trade Mark 'UNKIND' registered in favour of Ram Kumar M/S Dr. Kumars Pharmaceuticals.
Allowing the plea, the Court said that Mankind Pharma Limited has established that it is the prior registered proprietor and a prior user of the mark 'MANKIND' and KIND Family of Marks since 1986 through its predecessor.
It concluded that the Impugned Trade Mark “Unkind” was confusingly or deceptively similar to the Mankind Pharma's prior adopted, registered Mark 'MANKIND' and KIND Family of Marks.
“The Impugned Trade Mark has been adopted by Respondent No.1 dishonestly to trade upon the established goodwill and reputation of the Petitioner and to project itself to be associated with the Petitioner,” the Court said.
“Therefore, the continuation of the Impugned Trade Mark on the Register of Trade Marks is in contravention of the provisions of Section 11 of the Act and is liable to be cancelled under Section 57 of the Act,” it added.
Title: MANKIND PHARMA LTD v. RAM KUMAR M/S DR. KUMARS PHARMACEUTICALS
Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Del) 1011