A trademark and copyright infringement dispute arose between Dabur and VI-John, with Dabur filing a suit before the Commercial Court at Tis Hazari. The court issued summons to VI-John on July 18, 2024, and directed them to file a written statement within 30 days. However, VI-John delayed filing its written statement, citing ongoing settlement discussions, including proceedings in a parallel suit before the Saket court.
The written statement was finally filed on October 25, 2024, along with an application seeking condonation of the 48-day delay. The application explained the circumstances for the delay and provided records of the Saket court proceedings. Despite Dabur not raising any serious objections, the trial court on February 6, 2025, allowed the condonation application but imposed a cost of ₹25,000 per day, amounting to ₹12 lakh.
This decision was based solely on the earlier August 7 order, which had warned VI-John of the consequences of delaying the filing of its written statement. The imposition of such a significant cost has raised questions about the fairness of the trial court’s decision, particularly given that Dabur did not object to the condonation application. The case highlights the complexities of intellectual property disputes and the importance of adhering to court timelines and procedures.
The dispute between Dabur and VI-John centered on the use of the word “MISWAK” in VI-John’s packaging, which Dabur claimed infringed its trademark and copyright rights. The case is significant, as it involves two major companies in the Indian market, and the outcome may have implications for the broader intellectual property landscape in India. The trial court’s decision to impose a significant cost on VI-John may also have implications for the company’s financial situation and its ability to defend itself in the ongoing litigation.
Overall, the dispute between Dabur and VI-John is a complex and significant case that highlights the importance of intellectual property protection and the need for companies to carefully consider their branding and packaging to avoid infringing the rights of others. The case is ongoing, and the outcome is still uncertain, but the trial court’s decision to impose a significant cost on VI-John has already had a significant impact on the proceedings.