What began in 2019 as a dispute over a shared name between two South Indian restaurant brands has ended with a decisive verdict. A Delhi court has now upheld Carnatic Cafe’s exclusive rights to the ‘CARNATIC’ mark, barring a Bengaluru restaurant from using it in any form.
The court held that the Bengaluru entity’s use of the name infringed upon the registered trademark of Carnatic Cafe, which has been operating since 2011 and holds statutory rights over the brand.
[img=1px,1px]https://data.indianexpress.com/election2019/track_1x1.jpg[/img]ALSO READWho is Parth Pawar? Maharashtra CM orders probe into Rs 300-cr land deal involving Dy CM Ajit Pawar’s son
In its detailed order dated October 29, District Judge (Commercial) Neelam Singh of the Saket Courts directed Lemonpepper Hospitality Private Limited (company behind the Bengaluru outlet) and all persons associated with it to cease using the mark in any form. This includes manufacturing, selling, marketing, advertising or providing restaurant-related services under the name ‘CARNATIC’ or any mark “identical or deceptively similar” to ‘CARNATIC CAFE’.
The court further restrained the firm from operating any website or domain name containing the word ‘CARNATIC’ and directed it to transfer its existing domain name to the Delhi-based restaurant within one month.
Finding in favour of the plaintiff, owner Pavan Jambagi, the court said it was “satisfied that the plaintiff has successfully established its statutory rights as registered proprietor, its prior and continuous use, the goodwill associated with the mark and the defendants’ unauthorised use” of an identical name. It also awarded damages and litigation costs of Rs 60,000 to Carnatic Cafe for the harm caused to its goodwill and reputation.
Patna admin responds to ‘vote theft’ row after MP Shambhavi’s viral video shows ink on two fingers
All about the case
The dispute dates back to December 2018, when Carnatic Cafe discovered that Lemonpepper Hospitality had begun operating a restaurant in Bengaluru under the ‘CARNATIC’ name. Claiming that the adoption was unauthorised and intended to piggyback on its established brand value, the Delhi-based chain moved court in April 2019. A Delhi court had then granted an ex-parte ad-interim injunction restraining the Bengaluru firm from continuing use of the mark.
Judge Singh also observed that the defendants failed to file their written statements and submissions within the stipulated time. |
