Counterfeiting Of Medical Devices Is A Grave Offence; Endangering Lives Of People: Delhi HC

Read Time: 08 minutes

Synopsis

The court, during the proceedings, intercepted a conversation indicating that Medserve upon receiving complaints about infected counterfeit surgical products advised his associate to resolve the issue through bribery instead of corrective action. “Such conduct demonstrates blatant disregard for public health and safety”, the court opined.

The Delhi High Court, recently, granted damages worth INR 3.34 crores to Johnson & Johnson in a trademark infringement suit filed against Medserve for selling counterfeit medical devices. The court, while granting a permanent injunction in favor of Johnson & Johnson, highlighted that counterfeiting of medical devices is not just a matter of trademark violation; it is a severe offense that jeopardizes human lives.

The bench of Justice Amit Bansal held, “the counterfeit medical products sold by the defendants pose a significant threat to public health. Counterfeiting of medical devices is not merely a case of trade mark infringement, it is a grave offence that endangers the lives of people. The defendants’ conduct demonstrates a deliberate effort to mislead the public, jeopardize the consumer safety and exploit consumer trust for financial gain”. 

Johnson & Johnson is a New Jersey-based company dealing in consumer healthcare products, medical devices, and pharmaceuticals. The company acquired Ethicon Suture Laboratories in 1949, later renamed Ethicon Inc., which produced surgical sutures and wound-closing devices. Through Ethicon, Johnson & Johnson manufactured bleeding management medical devices under the trademarks 'SURGICEL' and 'ETHICON.' The 'SURGICEL' trademark originated in 1957, and the first oxidized regenerated cellulose hemostat was introduced in 1960. These products were marketed in India from the 1990s, with trademarks registered in multiple jurisdictions since 1958.

In 2019, the company detected counterfeit 'SURGICEL' devices, leading to legal action in the United States District Court, Florida. Further seizures at XS Supply linked the source to Lion Heart Surgical Supply in Florida, Pure Care Traders in the UAE, and Medserve in New Delhi, owned by Pritamdas Arora. 

The defendants denied wrongdoing but consented to a permanent injunction. On October 11, 2019, the court granted an ad-interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the trademarks. Subsequent orders extended the injunction and authorized seizures. On January 14, 2020, the injunction was made absolute. 

The court noted that Medserve repeatedly failed to disclose its financial transactions. Despite multiple court orders, Medserve withheld details of bank accounts and assets. The court directed multiple government agencies, including the Delhi Police, Bureau of Immigration, UIDAI, and Income Tax Department, to track the defendants and submit status reports. Despite these efforts, the defendants remained untraceable, indicating that they had no substantive defense and had absconded.

The court outlined that Medserve activities posed a severe risk to public health, as the counterfeit medical products lacked necessary sterility and quality standards. Furthermore, the court held that in cases of deliberate and malicious infringement, a stringent approach must be adopted while awarding damages. 

By selling substandard counterfeit products under the plaintiff’s trade marks, the defendants have misled consumers and associated the plaintiff’s name with the counterfeit goods”, the court added. 

The court found that counterfeiting medical products was not merely a case of trademark infringement but a grave offense endangering public safety. The fraudulent actions of the defendants also caused irreparable harm to the plaintiff’s goodwill. By selling substandard counterfeit products under Johnson & Johnson’s trademarks, the defendants misled consumers, associating the plaintiff’s name with inferior goods.

Therefore, the court granted Johnson & Johnson with the following reliefs: 

  • a decree of permanent injunction is passed in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants no. 1 and 2 in terms of prayer clauses A (i) to (iii) of the plaint.
  • the plaintiff is permitted to destroy the counterfeit products seized by the Local Commissioners during the execution of the commission and currently in the possession of the plaintiff
  • The damages are awarded in the following manner: (i) A sum of ₹2,34,82,986/- is awarded as compensatory damages in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants. (ii) A further sum of ₹1,00,00,000/- is awarded as exemplary damages in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants”.

For Plaintiff: Advocates Nancy Roy, Raghav Malik, Prakirti Varshney and Prashant
Case Title: Johnson & Johnson v Pritamdas Arora (2025:DHC:1585)