{"id":343607,"date":"2025-03-13T16:00:08","date_gmt":"2025-03-13T10:30:08","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=343607"},"modified":"2025-03-19T17:07:54","modified_gmt":"2025-03-19T11:37:54","slug":"delhi-high-court-334cr-damages-medserve-counterfeit-johnson-johnson-trademark-infringement-permanent-injunction-legal-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/03\/13\/delhi-high-court-334cr-damages-medserve-counterfeit-johnson-johnson-trademark-infringement-permanent-injunction-legal-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Delhi High Court awards \u20b93.34 cr damages against Medserve for selling counterfeit Johnson & Johnson surgical products"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Delhi High Court<\/span>: A suit was filed by Johnson & Johnson (plaintiff), a globally recognized pharmaceutical and healthcare company, seeking a permanent injunction against the defendants, for trademark infringement, counterfeiting, and passing off. Johnson & Johnson, through its subsidiary Ethicon, manufactures medical devices under the trademarks ‘SURGICEL’ and ‘ETHICON’. Amit Bansal, J., granted permanent injunction in favour of the plaintiff and imposed damages of 3 crores against the defendants jointly and severally.<\/p>\n

The case arose after counterfeiting surgical products were discovered at the University of Kentucky Medical Center in the United States. The investigation traced the source of these fake products to a supply chain involving multiple entities, including XS Supply in the USA, Lion Heart Surgical Supply LLC in Florida, and Pure Care Traders F.Z.E in the UAE. Further inquiries revealed that the counterfeit products originated from Medserve, a New Delhi-based company owned by the defendant. These fake medical devices, manufactured by unauthorized third parties in China and Turkey, were being repackaged and distributed internationally, posing serious health risks. Upon gathering substantial evidence, Johnson & Johnson filed the present suit seeking an immediate injunction and damages.<\/p>\n

The plaintiff contended that the defendants had engaged in large-scale counterfeiting operations, deliberately selling fake ‘SURGICEL’ and ‘ETHICON’ products. It was argued that the defendants’ actions posed a grave risk to public health, as the counterfeit products were found to be inadequately oxidized, non-sterile, and contaminated. Furthermore, the defendants had falsely applied Johnson & Johnson’s trademarks on counterfeit packaging, misleading customers and healthcare professionals. The plaintiff also presented evidence of the defendants’ involvement in repackaging expired medical products with falsified expiration dates. The plaintiff emphasized that the defendants’ actions had resulted in substantial financial losses and reputational damage.<\/p>\n

The Court examined extensive evidence, including reports from local commissioners, electronic communications, and financial transactions, establishing that the defendants had engaged in counterfeiting and illicit trade practices. The Court noted that:<\/p>\n