Allowed

Veerji Restaurant Private Limited v. Ankit Kumar & Ors.

Delhi HC9 Apr 2024CS(COMM)/717/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Delhi High Court, after discharging defendant counsel, passed a permanent injunction restraining defendants from trading under marks identical or similar to Plaintiff's 'Veerji Malai Chaap Wale' trademarks, including Rs.5 Lacs costs for non-compliance.

What did the court decide?

Permanent injunction restraining defendants from trading, supplying, or marketing goods/services under marks identical or deceptively similar to Plaintiff's 'Veerji Malai Chaap Wale'; Rs.5 Lacs costs.

Veerji Restaurant Private Limited Vs Ankit Kumar & Ors. — Consumer Protection | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~13

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- CS(COMM) 717/2022, I.A. 16836/2022, I.A. 3793/2023

¶4

& I.A. 19803/2023.

¶5

VEERJI RESTAURANT PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Plaintiff

¶6

Through: Mr. Nishant, Adv.

¶7

versus

¶8

ANKIT KUMAR & ORS. ..... Defendants

¶9

Through:

¶10

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANISH DAYAL

¶11

O R D E R

¶12

% 09.04.2024

¶13

Court notice was issued on 11^th January, 2024 by this Court to Mr. Shekhar Aggarwal, Advocate, who had earlier appeared for all the defendants.

¶14

Mr. Aggarwal, Advocate, appears today and states that he wishes to be discharged from the matter as he has not received any instructions from the defendants.

¶15

Accordingly, Mr. Shekhar Aggarwal, Advocate, stands discharged from the matter.

¶16

No one has been appearing on behalf of the defendants for the past few dates. Accordingly, the defendants are proceeded ex parte .

¶17

The ex parte ad interim injunction granted by this Court on 19^th October, 2022, in para 21 thereof, is made absolute and is extracted below:

¶18

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/04/2024 at 11:49:22

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.

¶21

The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/04/2024 at 11:49:22

¶22

The facts and circumstances in which the said suit was filed, and the applications moved, have been narrated by the Court in the order dated 19^th October, 2022, in para 14-20, which the Court has perused and notes them as the plaintiff’s position in the matter.

¶23

Plaintiff uses the domain name www.veerjimalaichaapwale.com and

¶24

has registered trademarks in different classes as tabulated below:

¶25

¶26

Defendant No.1 entered into a franchise agreement with the plaintiff on 18^th October, 2021. However, the agreement has terminated on 13^th August, 2022 and defendant No.1 filed a trademark application subsequently. The competing logos of the plaintiff and the defendants are as under:

¶27

Accordingly, decree is passed in terms of para 36 (a) and (b).

¶28

Decree sheet be drawn accordingly in terms of paras 36 (a) and (b) of the plaint and para 21(i), (ii) and (iii) of 19^th October, 2022, as noted above.

¶29

Paras 36(a) and (b) of the plaint are extracted below for reference: “ a. A decree for permanent injunction restraining the Defendants, their proprietor or partners as the case may be, servants, agents, affiliates, associates, stockiest, distributors, etc from trading, wholesaling, supplying, marketing, selling in any manner including physical or online sale or through e commerce portals, any services under the impugned mark Veerji Malai Chaap Wale or any other mark which are identical or deceptively similar to the Plaintiffs trade mark Veerji Malai Chaap wale amounting to infringement of the plaintiffs registered trademarks as mentioned above in plaint.

¶30

b. A Decree for Permanent Injunction Restraining the defendants, their proprietor or partners as the case may

¶31

¶32

be, servants, agents, affiliates, associates, stockiest, distributors etc. from trading, supplying, marketing, selling in any manner including physical or online sale or through e commerce portals, any goods or services under the impugned mark Veerji Malai Chaap wale or any other mark which are identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark Veerji Malai Chaap wale amounting to passing off the defendants goods as the plaintiffs goods, unfair competition and dilution .”

¶33

In view of the fact that there has been non-compliance of the orders of this Court as alleged by the plaintiff; and despite noted by this Court on 01^st November, 2023, that the directors of the defendants have not appeared despite being summoned; the plaintiff shall be entitled to costs in this regard, which are granted in favour of the plaintiff in the amount of Rs.5 Lacs.

¶34

Accordingly, decree sheet be drawn up with the aforesaid directions. 14. Suit is disposed of in these terms. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶35

Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

¶36

ANISH DAYAL, J

¶37

APRIL 9, 2024/MK/ rj

¶38

This is a digitally signed order.

¶39

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 15/04/2024 at 11:49:22

Veerji Restaurant Private Limited v. Ankit Kumar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Veerji Restaurant Private Limited v. Ankit Kumar & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanofi Sa & Ors. Vs Syndicate Medicare Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

The Bhaktivedanta Book Trust India Vs Www.Friendwithbooks.Co

M/S Gmr Property Developers Pvt. Limited and Anr. Vs J.J. Consultants Pvt. Limited

Retail Royalty Company & Anr. Vs Garvit Khandelwal, Trading as Ektarfa Garments & Anr.

Zomato Private Limited Formerly Zomato Media Pvt. Ltd. Vs Harsh Pandey & Ors.

M/S Trdp Happy World Pvt. Ltd. Vs M/S Anmol Beverages & Ors.

Ms. Vidushi Vijayvergiya & Anr. Vs Honasa Consumer Limited

Super Cassettes Industries Pvt. Ltd. Vs Ortel Communications Ltd.

Travelodge Hotels India (Ip) Pte. Ltd. Vs Travelodge Hotels Limited and the Registrar of Trademarks.

Mankind Prime Labs Private Limited Vs Registrar of Trade Marks

Sanofi Sa & Ors. Vs Syndicate Medicare Pvt. Ltd. & Anr.

Laurus Edutech Private Limited Vs Laureus World Sports Awards Limited and Anr.

Labrys Biologics Inc. Vs Controller of Patents

Sporta Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs John Doe and Others