The Delhi High Court has granted significant interim relief to health-tech firm PSTGems Private Limited by restraining Brahmastra Pharmacy from using the trademark "STAND UP" for its sexual wellness capsules. Justice Tushar Rao Gedela, presiding over the matter, observed that the defendant had adopted a label and trade dress that was "almost identical" to that of the plaintiff. The court’s decision underscores the judiciary's commitment to preventing consumer confusion in the pharmaceutical and nutraceutical sectors, where brand identity is inextricably linked to public trust.
PSTGems, which markets its products under the house mark "BRAMPIUM," alleged that it had coined and used the "STAND UP" mark since April 2024. The firm discovered in October 2025 that the defendant was selling Ayurvedic capsules under the same name through various retail and e-commerce platforms, including Amazon. The plaintiff presented evidence of actual consumer confusion, including queries from long-standing customers who mistakenly believed that Brahmastra Pharmacy was an affiliate or authorized partner of PSTGems.
In its defense, Brahmastra Pharmacy argued that "STAND UP" is a generic and descriptive expression that lacks the distinctiveness required for exclusive trademark protection. They further contended that their product was an "Ayurvedic proprietary medicine," distinguishing it from the plaintiff's nutraceutical offerings. However, the High Court rejected these arguments after a visual comparison of the rival products. The court noted that the placement of the mark, the font style, the color scheme, and even the heart-shaped logos were materially identical, creating a strong likelihood of deception.
A pivotal observation by the court was the "trade dress" similarity. Beyond the name itself, the defendant had replicated the specific layout of the packaging, including the table of parameters—"health," "desire," and "vitality." Justice Gedela remarked that permitting the continued use of such a deceptively similar label would cause irreparable injury to the plaintiff’s goodwill. The court emphasized that in the wellness industry, where products often target sensitive health issues, the "best evidence" of infringement is often the visual and phonetic mimicry of a successful brand.
The ruling also took into account the significant commercial footprint of PSTGems, which reported revenues exceeding ₹41 crores and substantial advertising expenditure. The court noted that a coordinate bench had previously granted similar relief to the plaintiff in 2025 against another infringer, reinforcing the prima facie strength of the "STAND UP" mark. This consistency in judicial approach provides a stable legal environment for brands to invest in distinct identity and artistic work.
From an expert legal standpoint, this case highlights the "dominant feature" test in trademark law. Even if a word is common, its stylized presentation and the surrounding artistic elements can acquire "secondary meaning." By focusing on the "stylized manner" of the two hearts and the specific font, the court clarified that traders cannot escape infringement claims by simply claiming their product belongs to a different medical category (Allopathic vs. Ayurvedic) if the branding remains deceptive.
The institutional implications are clear for e-commerce platforms like Amazon and 1mg. The court has directed the removal of the infringing listings, placing the onus on digital marketplaces to ensure that their platforms do not become conduits for trademark violations. This directive aligns with the growing judicial trend of holding intermediaries accountable for hosting content that prima facie infringes on registered intellectual property.
Ultimately, the Delhi High Court’s intervention ensures that competition in the sexual wellness market remains fair and transparent. The matter is set for further hearing in September 2026, but the current injunction effectively shuts down the defendant's ability to capitalize on the plaintiff’s established reputation. For consumers, the ruling serves as a vital safeguard against purchasing "look-alike" products that may not meet the quality standards they associate with their preferred brands.