Abbott Products Operations AG Vs Ms. Aprajita Sushma

Factual and Procedural Background:

Abbott, a long-standing healthcare company founded in the late 1800s and active in India since 1910, created and registered the brand name Pankreoflat in 1964 for a medicine that helps with stomach problems like bloating, and has sold it continuously since the 1970s with growing sales and heavy advertising. 

In 2021, a smaller firm named Alrom Pharmaceuticals registered a similar-sounding name Kreoflat for the exact same type of stomach medicine. Abbott discovered this in October 2024, sent a warning letter asking the firm to stop, but got no cooperation, so Abbott filed a court request in 2025 to cancel the newer registration due to likely customer mix-ups.

Core Dispute:

The main fight is whether Kreoflat copies Pankreoflat too closely in sound, look, and structure, risking confusion among buyers for identical gut health products, with Abbott arguing their older use and fame give them stronger rights, while the other side claims the names are totally different and their adoption was honest with its own growing popularity.

Reasoning and Decision of Court:

The court reviewed Abbott's strong proof like old sales receipts, accountant reports on sales jumping from about 21 million rupees in 2017 to 35 million in 2024, and ad spending over 14 million rupees, plus the lack of any real defense or evidence from the other side, who didn't even file a proper response. It agreed the names are confusingly alike, especially for medicines where mistakes could harm health, and sided with Abbott's prior rights over the newer registration. The court ordered the removal of Kreoflat from the official list, allowing both names to coexist would weaken Abbott's trusted brand.

Law Point Settled in the Case:

For drug brands, courts apply a tough standard—even small similarities can lead to cancellation to protect public safety and reward the first honest user over later copies.

Abbott Products Operations AG Vs Ms. Aprajita Sushma :26.02.2026, C.O.(COMM.IPD-TM) 163/2025:2026:DHC:1721: Justice Tushar Rao Gedela.

Disclaimer: Do not treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain subjective errors.

Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi

#IPUpdate #IPCaselaw #IPCaseLaw #IPLaw  #IPRNews #IPIndiaupdate #Trademark #Copyright #DesignLaw #PatentLaw #Cyber law  #LegalNews  #IndianIPUpdate  #AdvocateAjayAmitabhSuman #IPAdjutor