Dabur India has filed a plea before Wellford Pharma’s registration of the mark “Welford Pudin Hara,” asking that the trademark be cancelled. The central question before Delhi High Court is whether “Pudin Hara” is a distinctive, coined Ayurvedic brand belonging solely to Dabur — or whether another company may validly register it as a suffix.
The Court on Tuesday heard the plea. The case was heard by Justice Tejas Karia, who has reserved the plea for interim orders.
Dabur’s counsel asserted that “Pudin Hara” is a coined mark that it has used since 1930, supported by a 1979 trademark application and decades of market presence.
“This particular mark has been solely associated with the petitioner (Dabur) and the petitioner alone,” Dabur’s counsel submitted, insisting that any competing trademark registration would trigger confusion among consumers.
Dabur told the court that a trademark search revealed 29 registrations containing the word “Pudin Hara,” of which 27 belong to the company; one of the remaining two — the one now before the Court — was described by Dabur as a “direct imitation.”
According to Dabur, the respondent had “lifted the entirety” of Dabur’s earlier mark and merely suffixed it with “Wellford,” allegedly to exploit Dabur’s goodwill built over decades.
It was submitted that since Wellford Pharma is also engaged in medicinal products — just like Dabur — it would be “inconceivable” for it to be unaware of Dabur’s mark.
Dabur emphasised that “Pudin Hara” is consumed by both children and adults, and any confusion in medicinal products would not only harm the brand’s reputation but also “hamper public health.”
Dabur pointed out that Wellford Pharma’s impugned trademark registration was filed on a proposed-to-be-used basis in 2022 and registered in 2023 — yet, Dabur’s own search found no evidence of actual use of that rival mark in the market.
Alongside the cancellation petition, Dabur pressed an application seeking a stay on the effect of Wellford Pharma’s registration, and asked the court to restrain the rival company — at least from transferring the mark to third parties — pending the decision.
“We are the prior registered owners,” Dabur’s counsel argued, adding that identical marks in the same class would inevitably result in confusion and that to maintain the purity of the trademark register, Wellford Pharma’s impugned mark should be expunged.
