Introduction
The legal dispute over the rightful owner of the trademark for the Covid – 19 ( Covishield) vaccine has gained the attention of the masses over the past few weeks. Cutis – Biotech is a pharmaceutical company which is located in Nanded, Maharashtra. Serum Institute of India(SII) is a world-renowned pharma company based in Pune.

Brief Facts
The suit was filed before the civil court, Pune on 4th January by the Cutis- Biotech seeking an injunction order against the use of the trademark for the Covid- 19 Vaccine by Serum Institute of India. The Serum Institute replied to the application of the injunction against the issue of trademark and the same was listed to be heard by the court on January 22, 2021. On 22nd January, the court had held that it would weigh arguments by both the parties and decide on 30th January.

Legal Issue
This issue came into being because of the alleged infringement of trademark by Serum Institute of India. Cutis- Biotech claimed that they are prior users of the brand Covishield and the use of the same brand name by serum institute would infringe their rights. This case fundamentally revolves around the concept of trademarks which is an integral part of intellectual property rights. Trademarks allow differentiating the goods and services of one company with the other. Trademark may be inclusive of variety in shape, colour or word. In this case, the trademark at dispute is the word ‘Covishield’. The ground for filing the present lawsuit was based on the claim that Cutis- biotech is the prior user of the brand and possess exclusive rights over the word. They further claimed that there can be confusion over the trademark.

SII Contentions
The Serum Institute had submitted its response to the suit and it put forth several contentions which would allow the court to decide on the matter. The SII submitted that the parties at a dispute over the trademark operate in the different category which does not create any kind of confusion in the minds of the consumer.
Further, the Counsel for SII submitted that the claim by the Cutis- Biotech of it being the prior user of the name at dispute Covishield does not hold as SII has applied for the trademark registration in June 2020 whereas Cutis – Biotech made the application in December 2020. The Counsel for SII submitted that the case must be dismissed by the court as the plaintiff did not reveal all the necessary information regarding the application made to the Trademark registry. Based on these contentions, the Counsel for SII claimed that it is SII who becomes the prior user of the trademark.

Plaintiff Contentions
The Counsel for the Plaintiff submitted arguments on the issue of product distinction. The Counsel submitted that there is no necessity for the products to be identical for the purposes of this case to address the issue of confusion over the brand name.

Who gets to keep Covishield- SII or Cutis – Biotech?
Based on the arguments advanced by both the parties, the court rejected the injunction application filed by the plaintiff. The court also made note of the fact that the plaintiff had not disclosed and effectively concealed crucial facts. Further, the court also noted that the plaintiff did not provide enough evidence to show that the use of the term Covishield by the Serum Institute would cause loss to the plaintiff. For these reasons the court dismissed the application and ruled in fovour of Serum Institute.
The plaintiff however intend to file an appeal challenging the order passed by the Pune Court in the High Court after examining the merits of the case. This case has seen one of the biggest pharmaceutical company getting tangled in the technicalities of intellectual property rights, however, owing to the discrepancies on part of the plaintiff SII retains the right to use the trademark.