Disposed¶30

Mr R v. Vinoth Kumar Sole Proprietor Of Manjal v M/s Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited

Madras HC9 Apr 2025A/5489/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

MANJAL restaurant name passing off suit; interim injunction dated 15.07.2024 (O.A.No.426 of 2024); Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC wilful disobedience application; undertakings recorded; Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited; Manjal Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. impleaded as second defendant; Yercaud restaurant renamed MALI MESS; no restaurant opened on East-Coast Road (ECR); application closed; Madras High Court Commercial Division; Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy J.

What did the court decide?

Application closed upon recording the undertakings of Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited and Manjal Restaurants Pvt. Ltd. that neither is running nor will open any restaurant in the name 'MANJAL' until disposal of the suit. ¶30

Mr R v Vinoth Kumar Sole Proprietor Of Manjal Vs M/s Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited — Madras HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS

¶2

DATED : 09.04.2025

¶3

CORAM

¶4

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY

¶5

A.No.5489 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.109 of 2024

¶6

Mr R V Vinoth Kumar Sole Proprietor Of Manjal No 6 9 kasturi Estate 3rd Street Poes Garden Chennai 600 018 ... Applicant -vs-

¶7

M/s Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited Having office at New No.2/4, Old No.101/4, Ganesh Apartment, Kanagasree Nagar, Cathedral Road, Gopalapuram, Chennai 600 086.No 6 9 kasturi Estate 3rd Street Poes Garden Chennai 600 018 ... Respondent

¶8

For Applicant : Mr.M.Dhanush for Mr.Vijayan Subramanian

¶9

For Respondent : Mr.R.Krishnakumar for R1 Mr.Sreekar Aechuri for R2

¶10

********** ORDER

¶11

The suit was initially filed against Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited

¶12

seeking relief in respect of alleged passing off by operating restaurants

¶13

1/5

¶14

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶15

under the name MANJAL. By order dated 15.07.2024, an interim injunction was granted restraining the respondent, Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited, from operating a restaurant under the name MANJAL at Yercaud and also restraining the opening of restaurants in the said name in any other place till the disposal of the suit.

¶16

Upon being informed that the restaurant at Yercaud was being operated by Manjal Restaurants Pvt. Ltd., (Manjal Restaurants) the said entity was impleaded as the second defendant. By alleging that there was wilful disobedience of the said order of interim injunction, the present application was filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.

¶17

By affidavit dated 16.12.2024, which was affirmed by M.Aravinth Raj, Authorized Signatory of Kallal Hospitalities, it was stated, in relevant part, as under:

¶18

“The restaurants at ECR and yercaud locations are run by entirely different legal entity which is “Manjal Restaurants Pvt Ltd” and this respondent has no involvement.

¶19

2/5

¶20

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶21

In the above circumstances I undertake that the respondent company is not running any restaurant in the name of “MANJAL” and undertake that the respondent company will not open any new restaurant in the name of “MANJAL” until the disposal of this present suit.”

¶22

Affidavit dated 03.02.2025 was filed on behalf of Manjal Restaurants, wherein it is stated as under:

¶23

“1. I respectfully submit that after coming know about the Hon'ble Madras High Court in O.A.No.426 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024 with the compliance of the order, I temporarily changed the restaurant name from “MANJAL RESTAURANTS” to “MALI MESS” at No.3/9/3, Ladies Street Road, Ondikadai, Yercaud – 636 601 and temporarily we are not using the name “MANJAL” on any internet platforms as well.

¶24

¶25

3/5

¶26

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶27

On instructions, learned counsel for MANJAL Restaurants states

¶28

that no restaurant was opened on the East-Coast Road.

¶29

By recording the above undertakings by both Kallal Hospitalities

¶30

and Manjal Restaurants, this application is closed.

09.04.2025

(1/2)

rna

4/5

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

¶36

SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY,J

¶37

rna

¶38

A.No.5489 of 2024 in C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.109 of 2024

¶39

09.04.2025 (1/2)

¶40

5/5

¶41

https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

Procedural history

How this case reached the court

AI extract

Prior proceeding
Suit C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.109 of 2024 initially filed against Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited.¶11
Prior proceeding
Relief claimed in the suit in respect of alleged passing off by operating restaurants under the name MANJAL.¶12
Prior proceeding
Interim injunction ordered on 15.07.2024 (per the affidavit, in O.A.No.426 of 2024 before the Madras High Court) restraining Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited from operating a restaurant under the name MANJAL at Yercaud and from opening restaurants in that name elsewhere till disposal of the suit.¶15
Prior proceeding
On learning that the Yercaud restaurant was operated by Manjal Restaurants Pvt. Ltd., that entity was impleaded as the second defendant.¶16
Prior proceeding
Present application A.No.5489 of 2024 filed under Order XXXIX Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 alleging wilful disobedience of the interim injunction.¶16
Prior proceeding
Affidavit dated 16.12.2024 affirmed by M.Aravinth Raj, Authorized Signatory of Kallal Hospitalities.¶17
Prior proceeding
Kallal Hospitalities stated that the ECR and Yercaud restaurants are run by a different legal entity, Manjal Restaurants Pvt Ltd, with no involvement of the respondent company.¶18
Prior proceeding
Undertaking by Kallal Hospitalities that it is not running and will not open any restaurant in the name MANJAL until disposal of the suit.¶21
Prior proceeding
Affidavit dated 03.02.2025 filed on behalf of Manjal Restaurants.¶22
Prior proceeding
Manjal Restaurants stated that, in compliance with the order in O.A.No.426 of 2024 dated 15.07.2024, it temporarily changed the Yercaud restaurant's name from MANJAL RESTAURANTS to MALI MESS and stopped using MANJAL on internet platforms.¶23
Prior proceeding
Undertaking by Manjal Restaurants that it is not running and will not open any restaurant in the name MANJAL until disposal of the suit.¶24
Prior proceeding
Learned counsel for Manjal Restaurants stated on instructions that no restaurant was opened on the East-Coast Road.¶28

Mr R v. Vinoth Kumar Sole Proprietor Of Manjal v M/s Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr R v. Vinoth Kumar Sole Proprietor Of Manjal v M/s Kallal Hospitalities Private Limited

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mr R v Vinoth Kumar Vs Manjal

Mr.S.Sekar Vs M/s.Vyas Nuilding Pvt. Ltd.

Mr v Vasudevan Vs Karthik M Manikandan

Sri Ramachandra Educational and Health Trust Vs Dr. Babaseheb Ambedkar Vaidyakiya Prathishtan Sanchalit Shri Ramachandra Institute of Medical Scien

Anandbabu Mamadepali Vs M.Partheeban

Telegram Fz Llc Vs M/s.Swamy Publishers (P) Ltd.