Mumbai: The Bombay High Court has issued an ex-parte order in a John Doe action filed by Unilever Global IP Limited against counterfeit and contraband dental products, protecting its intellectual property rights in the market.
Justice Manish Pitale delivered significant directives aimed at preventing the manufacture and distribution of counterfeit products bearing Unilever’s registered trademarks in various markets across India.
The court addressed the case involving Unilever Global IP Limited and Anr. v. “Ashok Kumar” (a John Doe designation). The applicants asserted their intellectual property rights in registered trademarks—CLOSEUP, PEPSODENT, HUL, HINDUSTAN UNILEVER, and the U-LOGO—as well as original artistic works associated with these brands.
Examining specific concerns about counterfeit products, the court observed:
“In the first week of March 2025, when the applicants got an investigation conducted in the markets of Patnipura and Ranipura at Indore, Madhya Pradesh, and Pandra Krishi Bazaar, Ranchi, Jharkhand, they came across the impugned products.”
The court highlighted two categories of infringing products:
“One category being absolute counterfeit products, while the other category being termed as contraband goods. The second category of contraband goods are products that appear to have been purchased from Nepal and illegally imported into India, to be mixed with counterfeit products.”
In a specific directive, the court stated:
“This Court is convinced that sufficient material is placed on record on behalf of the applicants to show that the impugned products found in the markets at Indore and Ranchi are nothing but counterfeit products, and that the applicants are entitled to press for urgent ex-parte ad-interim reliefs.”
The court emphasized the legal position regarding contraband products, referencing the Delhi High Court judgment in Philip Morris Products S.A. & Anr. v. Sameer & Ors., which established:
“Smuggled products being sold in the grey market would amount to infringement of the intellectual property rights of the applicants.”
The nature of the violations was underscored as follows:
“The copying was to such an extent that the counterfeit products appeared to be genuine products of the applicants. It was highlighted that in the counterfeit products, the country Nepal is wrongly spelt as ‘Napal,’ and there are other differences.”
The court further directed:
“The Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, is appointed with powers under Order XL Rule 1 and Order XXXIX Rule 7 of the Code of Civil Procedure; a direction to visit and search all premises of the defendants, forcibly breaking open locks if necessary, and also, where necessary, with police assistance.”
Emphasizing the need for decisive action, the court ordered:
“Nineteen Advocates are appointed as Additional Special Receivers to execute the order” across different locations, to seize and make inventories of infringing products.
The court has directed the Additional Special Receivers to submit their reports to the Court Receiver by June 16, 2025, with the matter listed for further consideration on June 30, 2025.
Mr. Hiren Kamod, along with Laher Shah and Jayesh Kalebere, appeared for the Applicants/Plaintiffs.
Case Title: Unilever Global IP Limited & Anr. v. Ashok Kumar
![Husband Can Also Claim Alimony/Maintenance From Wife: Bombay High Court Orders Woman To Pay Alimony To Ex-Husband [Read Order]](/secure/uploads/2022/04/lj_2823_Divorce.jpg)
