The Delhi High Court has allowed a Moradabad-based restaurant named “Gulshan-e-Karim” to continue using its name, provided it displays a clear disclaimer stating that it has no connection with the famous Delhi restaurant chain “Karim’s.” The Court held that while the two marks are similar, the infringement by the Moradabad restaurant was innocent and not deliberate, and therefore a complete prohibition on its use would be disproportionate.
The case arose after Karim Hotels Pvt. Ltd., which operates the well-known Karim’s restaurant in Delhi since 1913, filed a lawsuit alleging trademark infringement against the Moradabad restaurant run by Mohammad Talha. The plaintiff claimed that the use of the word “Karim” by the Moradabad outlet could mislead consumers into believing there was an association with the Delhi brand, given that both establishments served similar Mughlai cuisine. It argued that the word “Karim” had acquired a distinctive and well-known status in the culinary industry.
A Commercial Court at Tis Hazari had earlier granted an injunction restraining the Moradabad restaurant from using the name “Karim.” However, on appeal, a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court comprising Justice C. Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul modified the lower court’s order. The Bench noted that the use of the name by the Moradabad restaurant appeared to be without malicious intent and could be classified as an innocent infringement. The Court observed that the legal approach toward such cases must differ from those involving deliberate or dishonest misuse of trademarks.
The High Court emphasized that the remedy in cases of innocent infringement should be proportionate, balancing the rights of the established brand owner and the small business involved. It ruled that instead of imposing a total ban, confusion among the public could be effectively mitigated through a visible and comprehensive disclaimer. The Court directed that “Gulshan-e-Karim” must display the disclaimer prominently on all signboards, menus, advertisements, packaging, and online platforms, making it clear that the establishment is not associated in any way with the Delhi-based Karim’s chain.
By allowing the restaurant to continue operating under its existing name with these conditions, the Court underscored the importance of fairness in trademark enforcement. It highlighted that while brand protection is essential to prevent consumer deception and reputation dilution, the response must remain proportionate to the intent and impact of the infringement. The ruling demonstrates the judiciary’s balanced approach in protecting established trademarks while also considering the circumstances of smaller businesses operating in good faith.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.