The plaintiff, Johnson & Johnson, is a globally recognized healthcare conglomerate based in New Jersey, USA, with over 230 subsidiaries and operations in more than 60 countries. Through its subsidiary Ethicon, it manufactures and distributes surgical medical devices under registered trademarks such as ‘SURGICEL’, ‘ETHICON’, and ‘LIGACLIP’. These marks have been in use in India since the 1990s and are registered across several jurisdictions including India. Johnson & Johnson’s products are particularly critical for bleeding management during surgery and have a high reputation for sterility, safety, and reliability.
The suit was initiated after a counterfeit ‘SURGICEL’ device was discovered during brain surgery at the University of Kentucky in the USA in 2019. An investigation revealed that over 1,000 counterfeit units were supplied to the university by XS Supply, a U.S.-based entity, which had sourced the devices from Lion Heart Surgical Supply LLC. Lion Heart had, in turn, obtained the products from Pure Care Traders F.Z.E., based in the UAE. Crucially, Pure Care provided documentation identifying Pritamdas Arora, operating through his business M/s Medserve in New Delhi, India, as the original supplier. Johnson & Johnson undertook international legal proceedings including seizures and preliminary injunctions in the U.S., and subsequently filed this suit in India.
The plaintiff’s evidence revealed that counterfeit products originating from the defendants were found to be contaminated and inadequately oxidized, posing severe health risks. Further investigation uncovered a deliberate international distribution network managed by defendant no.1, Mr. Pritamdas Arora, aided by his wife, defendant no.2, Ms. Ritika Arora. Evidence extracted from raids, including WhatsApp chats, emails, and hard drives, showed that the defendants had knowingly manufactured, repackaged, and exported counterfeit surgical devices, including expired goods with falsified expiry labels.
On 11 October 2019, an ad-interim injunction was granted in favour of the plaintiff, and Local Commissioners were appointed to seize infringing goods. Multiple premises were raided, and a vast volume of counterfeit products, shipping records, forged authorization letters, and digital evidence were seized. Defendant no.1 was later found to have forged stamps of Johnson & Johnson and maintained communication with international counterfeit suppliers from Turkey and China. Despite court orders, both defendants absconded and failed to appear before the court, resulting in ex-parte proceedings from 6 December 2022.
In evaluating the evidence, the Court noted that the defendants deliberately engaged in counterfeiting and intellectual property violations on an international scale. The court took serious note of voice messages and transcripts in which the defendant admitted to selling expired goods and instructed associates to falsify documentation to conceal the nature of the products. Financial records revealed proceeds exceeding ₹9.39 crores, and additional evidence of Hawala transactions was also placed on record.
The Court found the defendants liable for trade mark infringement, counterfeiting, passing off, and fraudulent misrepresentation. The Judge stressed that counterfeiting of surgical products posed an egregious threat to public health and could not be viewed merely as commercial infringement. The defendants' conduct was declared calculated, willful, and malicious, necessitating punitive action.
Accordingly, the Hon’ble Court granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the plaintiff’s marks or dealing in counterfeit medical devices. The plaintiff was authorized to destroy the seized infringing goods. The Court awarded compensatory damages of ₹2,34,82,986/- (calculated at 25% of the established sales of counterfeit goods) and exemplary damages of ₹1,00,00,000/- to deter similar violations in the future. Actual costs were also granted, to be determined upon submission of a bill of costs by the plaintiff under the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018.
This judgment strongly reaffirms the Court's commitment to protecting intellectual property, particularly in the medical domain, and sends a powerful message against those engaged in counterfeiting of life-saving devices. The judgment upholds both statutory and equitable principles, balancing enforcement of trade mark rights with the overriding public interest in health and safety.
Cause Title: Johnson & Johnson Vs. Pritamdas Arora
Case Number: CS(COMM) 570/2019
Neutral Citation: [2025:DHC:1585]
Date of Order: 11 March 2025
Court: High Court of Delhi at New Delhi
Judge: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Amit Bansal
