Delhi High Court Restrains Rajasthan-based Restaurant From Using 'Sadda Pind' Name

The Delhi High Court has restrained a Rajasthan-based restaurant from using the name of Sadda Pind, which is a famous tourist destination in Punjab."The Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case in its favour for grant of an ex-parte interim injunction. Accordingly, till the next date of hearing, the Defendant shall stand restrained from using the mark & name 'SADDA PIND' including the device thereof in respect of any resort/restaurant, accommodation, hotel and entertainment venue or in relation to any other allied or cognate services. The Defendant shall also stand restrained from using any identical or deceptively similar name as that of the Plaintiff, i.e., 'SADDA PIND'," Justice Prathiba M. Singh said in the order.JDM Heritage Lawns Heritage Private Limited, which owns the 'Sadda Pind' mark has approached the Delhi High Court with a suit seeking injunction to restrain Ankit Chawla, who runs 'Sadda Pind Restaurant', from the "brazen acts" of infringement, passing off, unfair competition and misuse of the 'Sadda Pind' name and logo.According to the suit before the high court, Sadda Pind is spread over across 12 acres of land in Amritsar, comprising a Punjabi Culture Living Museum and provides dining, accommodation and entertainment among other services."It offers informative and immersive paid tours of its traditional rural village project which reflects on the rural life during the pre-1950's era of the geographical location where the property is located," the company owning the project has told the court.The mark 'SADDA PIND' and the logo as also the various expressions used such as 'SADDA PIND, Jewel of Punjab' 'SADDA PIND, Flavours Celebrations Culture' etc. are all registered trademarks under class 43 since 2015, as per the suit.Sadda Pind owners in May 2022 are stated to have acquired knowledge regarding adoption of the same name by a restaurant at NH-48, Ramchandpura, Rajasthan. The court was told the eatery has put listings on popular food delivery apps and other third-party websites.In response to a notice, Chawla had earlier told the JDM Heritage Lawns that the specific logo it is using bears no similarity with 'Sadda Pind' logo it is using the mark '5 ADDA PIND'.The court rejected the claim and said the defendant is using 'Sadd Pind' mark, which is is an identical mark, name, logo and device as that of the Plaintiff."Even the letter 5 is in a manner so as to appear close to `S' so that `5adda' is read as `Sadda'. The goodwill and reputation of the Plaintiff is clearly determinable from the various media articles, brochures, catalogues, advertisement material, coverage by third party and well known publications such as Amristsar Bhaskar, Amritsar Savera, Hindustan Times, Tribune, NDTV etc," said the court.The court said though the plaintiff may be having its property in Amritsar, its registered office is in Delhi and there "is a reasonable scope of expansion" for the Plaintiff as contemplated in the 2-judge bench judgement of the Supreme Court in Laxmikant V Patel vs. Chetanbhat Shah and Anr., (2002). "It is a fact of which judicial notice can be taken that presently, bookings through online portals have become the norm and the geographical location of parties does not, in any manner, avoid the chances of confusion between identical marks and names. The listing of the Plaintiff and the Defendant using an identical mark and name as also logo is bound to create deception in the minds of the customers that the Defendant's property is in some manner associated or a part of the Plaintiff," said the court.The court further said the defendant has not only adopted an identical mark and name but has also adopted an almost identical logo and device."Photographs of the Plaintiff's property are being showcased on the Defendant's Google listings. The Defendant obviously has complete knowledge of the Plaintiff's reputation and goodwill and has made a deliberate attempt to encash upon the same. Hence, the Court has no doubt that the adoption by the Defendant is dishonest and the continuous use by the Defendant would constitute infringement of the registered trademark and passing off, inasmuch as the customers, who may have visited the Plaintiff's location in Amritsar, as they may also believe that there is some linkage between the resorts of the Plaintiff and that of the Defendant," said the bench.While passing the restraining order, the court said the injunction shall come into effect from November 15. "No further outlets or properties or resorts etc. shall be opened by the Defendant under the impugned mark and name with immediate effect," it said.The court has listed the application for further consideration on January 9, 2023.Title: JMD HERITAGE LAWNS PRIVATE LIMITED vs. MR . ANKIT CHAWLA PROPRIETOR SADDA PIND RESTAURANTClick Here To Read/Download Order

Delhi High Court Restrains Rajasthan-based Restaurant From Using 'Sadda Pind' Name

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags