Delhi High Court Stays Registration of “Wellford Pudin Hara” Trademark in Dispute With Dabur

 

The Delhi High Court has intervened in a trademark dispute between Dabur India Limited and Wellford Pharmaceutical Private Limited over the use and registration of the mark “Wellford Pudin Hara.” Dabur, a longstanding manufacturer of the popular digestive remedy Pudin Hara, approached the High Court challenging the validity of Wellford’s trademark registration on the ground that it was deceptively similar to its own mark and likely to cause consumer confusion.

Dabur’s case was that it had adopted the “Pudin Hara” mark decades ago — asserting use of the brand since 1930 and the first trademark registration in 1979 — for its ayurvedic, medicinal, pharmaceutical and digestive care products. The company argued that this long history of continuous use and substantial investment in advertising and sales had generated extensive goodwill and consumer association with its mark. Dabur contended that Wellford’s mark, which appended its own house name to the identical words “Pudin Hara,” was not an independent brand identity but a clear attempt to ride on Dabur’s established reputation and mislead the public into assuming a connection with Dabur’s product line.

In its petition, Dabur asserted that the trademark adopted by Wellford created what the law describes as a “likelihood of confusion” because the impugned mark essentially “completely subsumes” Dabur’s mark for goods in the same class — pharmaceutical and medicinal products. The petition alleged that Wellford’s conduct in adopting the mark appeared prima facie dishonest and with mala fide intent to capitalise on Dabur’s established reputation rather than create a distinct brand.

After considering the materials placed before it, the Delhi High Court accepted that Dabur had established prior adoption and long continuous use of the “Pudin Hara” name, and that there was a real risk consumers might be confused by the similarity of the marks if registration were permitted to operate while the case proceeded. The Court observed that allowing the registration to remain in force during the pendency of the dispute could cause grave prejudice to Dabur by undermining its trademark rights and potentially diluting the distinctiveness of its mark.

On this basis, the Court stayed the operation of Wellford’s trademark registration for “Wellford Pudin Hara” until March 17, 2026, during which period the substantive petition under Section 57 of the Trade Marks Act will be heard. In doing so, the Court also restrained Wellford from transferring or creating any third-party rights in the mark while the stay remains in effect. The stay order prevents the respondent from benefiting commercially from the disputed mark until the legal issues surrounding likelihood of deception and infringing similarity are resolved on merits.

The Court’s order reflects the jurisprudential principle that when an identical or deceptively similar mark is adopted in the same class of goods, and prior use and established goodwill can be demonstrated, interim relief — including stays on registration — may be granted to prevent further harm to the senior user’s trademark rights while the dispute is adjudicated.

The matter is listed for further hearing before the High Court in March 2026, when the merits of Dabur’s challenge to the Wellford mark will be examined. The interim stay preserves the status quo and safeguards the distinctiveness and integrity of well-established trademarks in the Indian market.

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community