The Delhi High Court has permanently restrained several local dhabas operating along the Delhi-Dehradun highway from using the registered trademarks of the well-known Murthal-based eatery, Mannat Dhaba.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Criticizes DGFT for Delayed DEPB License Cancellation
Justice Amit Bansal ruled in favor of Mannat Group of Hotels and its promoter, Virender Singh Kadyan, affirming their legal rights over the trademark ‘MANNAT.’ The court found that the defendant restaurants were unlawfully benefiting from the goodwill and reputation of Mannat Dhaba by using its branding and trademarks.
Court's Observations and Ruling
The court highlighted that the plaintiffs had established strong statutory, proprietary, and common law rights over the trademark 'MANNAT.' It noted that the defendants were deliberately using names and branding similar to Mannat Dhaba to mislead customers.
"The defendants have slavishly and deliberately adopted and are using the plaintiffs' brands and trademarks in respect of restaurant services to confuse consumers and the public at large," observed Justice Bansal.
The case originated when the plaintiffs discovered that several local eateries along the Delhi-Dehradun highway were operating under deceptively similar names, such as ‘Manat Dhaba,’ ‘Mannatt Dhaba,’ ‘New Mannatt Dhaba,’ and ‘Shri Mannatt Dhaba.’ These names bore striking resemblance to the well-established brand Mannat Dhaba, leading to consumer confusion and potential financial losses for the plaintiffs.
Background of the Case
Mannat Group of Hotels Private Limited, incorporated in 2008, has built a strong brand presence in India’s highway hospitality sector. The plaintiffs contended that their brand 'MANNAT' was widely recognized and had earned substantial goodwill over the years. The company's financial records revealed a revenue of Rs.1,02,67,92,520 for the financial year 2022-2023, with significant investments in marketing and promotion.
Additionally, Mannat Group holds valid trademark registrations under multiple classes, including Class 29, 32, 33, 35, 43, and 45. Despite the clear legal ownership of these trademarks, the defendants continued to use similar branding, misleading customers into believing they were affiliated with Mannat Group.
Legal Proceedings
The case was initially presented in December 2023, when summons were issued against the defendants. On January 4, 2024, the court granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction against some of the defendants, restricting them from using the disputed trademarks.
Read Also:- Delhi High Court Declares Serious Fraud Allegations as Non-Arbitrable
During subsequent hearings, the court noted that some of the defendants had stopped using the Mannat branding and adopted new names. As a result, the plaintiffs withdrew their claims against those defendants. However, two of the defendants continued to use the infringing trademarks and failed to file a written statement or defend themselves in court. Consequently, they were proceeded against ex-parte.
Trademark Infringement and Consumer Confusion
Citing a previous case (Foodlink F and B Holdings India Pvt. Ltd. v. Wow Momo Foods Pvt. Ltd., 2023 SCC OnLine Del 4719), the court reiterated the concept of ‘initial interest confusion’ in trademark infringement cases.
"The matter has to be examined from the perspective of the customer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection, who is neither a genius nor a fool. The consumer, moreover, must be one who is not overly familiar with either mark," the ruling stated.
This principle establishes that even if customers later realize the difference between the brands, the initial confusion itself constitutes trademark infringement. The defendants, by using similar branding, were misleading customers into believing they were associated with Mannat Dhaba.
After reviewing the evidence and legal precedents, the Delhi High Court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, granting a permanent injunction against the infringing dhabas.
"The defendants are blatantly violating the plaintiffs’ statutory, proprietary, and common law rights. They have deliberately adopted the plaintiffs' trademarks and branding with minor variations to mislead customers. Therefore, a clear case of passing off is also established," stated the judgment.
As a result, the court ordered the defendants to cease using any branding similar to Mannat Dhaba immediately.
Counsel for Plaintiffs: Mr. Subhash Bhutoria and Ms. Anuja Negi, Advocates
Title: MANNAT GROUP OF HOTELS PRIVATE LIMITED & ANR. v. M/S MANNAT DHABA & ORS.
