A Commercial Court in Delhi granted a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using the “KARIM’S FOOD” mark or any deceptively similar variant, and awarded punitive damages of Rs. 2 lakhs along with costs to the plaintiff.
The suit was filed by M/s Karim Hotels Pvt. Ltd. (plaintiff), a century-old Mughlai restaurant chain, against Karim’s Food (defendant) for infringement and passing off under Sections 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The plaintiff claimed prior use and registration of the “KARIM”, “KARIM’S”, and “KAREEM” trademarks across numerous classes and sought protection from deceptive similarity harming its reputation.
The defendant, operating a restaurant under the name “KARIM’S FOOD” in Rampur, UP, had ignored legal notice from the plaintiff, continued using the mark, and failed to appear in court, leading to the defense being struck off.
The plaintiff relied on extensive trademark registrations, historic usage, financial statements, and media coverage to establish goodwill and distinctiveness.
The Bench comprising District Judge Sanjeev Kumar Malhotra applied the similarity test, emphasizing the confusion likely caused to average consumers by visual and phonetic resemblance. Noting that the defendant’s adoption was dishonest, and based on unrebutted proof, the court held the likelihood of confusion and damage to the plaintiff’s goodwill. The Court affirmed that such protection for historic and registered marks is essential to prevent consumer confusion and ensure brand integrity.
The Court issued a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, agents, and representatives from using “KARIM’S FOOD” or any similar mark. The plaintiff was awarded Rs. 2 lakhs as punitive damages to deter infringement and compensate for reputation harm. The costs of the suit were also imposed on the defendant.
Cases relied on:
1. Larsen and Toubro Limited vs. Chagan Bhai Patel, MIPR 2009(1)194
2. Microsoft Corporation vs. Rajendra Pawar and Anr., 2008 (36) PTC 697 (Del.)
