The Himachal Pradesh High Court at Shimla has dismissed a trademark infringement suit filed by Zydus Wellness Products Ltd., holding that the company failed to comply with the mandatory pre-litigation mediation requirement under the Commercial Courts Act, 2015. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel delivered the ruling on 29 August 2025, while deciding an application filed by Karnal Foods Pack Cluster Limited and others.
Background
Zydus, the maker of the well-known energy drink mix Glucon-D, approached the court alleging that the defendants were selling similar glucose-based products under the names Glucose-D, Glucospoon-D, and Glucose-C. According to the company, these names and packaging were deceptively similar to its registered trademarks and amounted to infringement.
Read also:- Chhattisgarh High Court Directs Revenue Officer to Decide Pending Compensation Dispute in Three Months
The plaintiff had sought multiple reliefs, including injunctions restraining the defendants from using the disputed marks, destruction of infringing goods, damages of over one crore rupees, and recognition of Glucon-D as a well-known trademark.
On their part, the defendants argued that the plaint was not maintainable at all since Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act makes it mandatory for parties to first attempt mediation before approaching the court, unless the case demands urgent interim relief.
Read also:- Gauhati High Court remands tribunal's order declaring Assam woman as foreigner for fresh review
Court's Observations
Justice Goel examined the timeline. Zydus first issued a cease-and-desist notice in April 2023, followed by several reminders. The company, however, filed the suit only in 2025, claiming fresh urgency based on continued sales and a WhatsApp offer made by one of the defendants in December 2024.
The Judge noted that nothing "qualitatively new" had happened between April 2023 and the filing of the case.
"The application is completely silent on what necessitated urgent relief, bypassing the statutory provisions of Section 12A," the bench observed.
Read also:- Karnataka High Court Directs Lower Court to Decide Injunction Plea Within Four Weeks in Property Dispute
Relying on a series of recent Supreme Court rulings, including Patil Automation (2022) and Yamini Manohar (2024), the court emphasized that mediation is a mandatory first step in commercial disputes unless a genuine and immediate interim relief is required. The Judge warned that urgent relief should not be used as a "camouflage" to escape statutory obligations.
Decision
The High Court concluded that Zydus had no valid justification for avoiding mediation.
"The act of the plaintiff in bypassing Section 12A of the Act cannot be condoned," Justice Goel held,
Adding that the plaint must be rejected under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the Civil Procedure Code.
Accordingly, the court rejected the plaint and disposed of pending applications, clarifying that the non-grant of interim relief did not influence its reasoning.
The order effectively sends Zydus back to the drawing board, reminding litigants that commercial suits cannot sidestep statutory mediation requirements.
Case Title: Zydus Wellness Products Ltd. v. Karnal Foods Pack Cluster Limited and others
Case No.: OMP No. 644 of 2025 in COMS No. 1 of 2025
