As recognized to most Indian, within the nation and overseas, the mere reference to “HALDIRAM” has conjured up photos of delectable snacks, savoury sweets, and the mouth-watering aromas of India’s cherished culinary heritage. From bustling metropolis streets to quaint rural cities, this homegrown model has turn into a fixture in households throughout the subcontinent and past. Lastly, the Delhi Excessive Courtroom in its landmark ruling in Haldiram India Non-public Restricted vs Berachah Gross sales Company & Ors[1], has acknowledged HALDIRAM’S’ preeminent standing, declaring the model’s trademark as “well-known” emblems.
The Courtroom whereas delivering the judgment quoted;
“As evidenced by the paperwork positioned on document, plaintiff’s international footprint is indicative of the model’s sturdy spill-over the place the authenticity of ‘HALDIRAM’S’ merchandise resonate with a various with a various viewers together with in these areas the place the model doesn’t have authorized presence[2]’’.
By delving into the authorized intricacies, this piece goals to empower readers with a deeper understanding of the idea of well-known emblems, passing-off[3] motion, infringement fits and the important function they play in shielding customers from deception and confusion.
Background of the Case
The roots of this authorized dispute stretch again to 1941 when the mark ‘HALDIRAM BHUJIAWALA/HALDIRAM’S’ was first coined, drawing inspiration from the founder’s grandfather’s nickname. Since its inception, Haldiram has burgeoned from a modest institution in Bikaner, Rajasthan, into a world culinary phenomenon, famend for its unwavering dedication to high quality and innovation.
Based on the plaintiff, HALDIRAM’S makes use of two distinct marks for its model – the V-shaped and the oval-shaped brand. The V-shaped mark options the letters “HRB” organized in a dynamic, angular configuration. That is Haldiram’s registered trademark “HALDIRAM BHUJIAWALA,” which the corporate has been utilizing since 1965. This daring brand immediately evokes Haldiram’s wealthy culinary heritage. The oval-shaped brand frames the “HALDIRAM’S” identify in a chic design. Haldiram makes use of this brand throughout its registered emblems, particularly for its meals merchandise. These two brand designs have turn into synonymous with Haldiram’s enduring legacy. The corporate strategically makes use of these registered emblems throughout its expansive product vary, making a cohesive and immediately recognizable model id. In 2019, the defendants’ initially included an organization with the identify “Haldiram Restro Pvt. Ltd’’ which was the graduation of their infringing exercise. Subsequently, the plaintiff introduced a go well with in opposition to the defendants beneath part 16(1)(b) of the Corporations Act, 2013[4]. The defendant firm additionally went forward with the registration of the area identify www.haldiramrestro.com.
The defendants didn’t cease right here, however they began promoting merchandise like salt, oil, water, soda, ghee and so forth. to different corporations through on-line and offline interactions. The defendants’ unauthorized use of the “HALDIRAM” mark began inflicting client confusion, doubtlessly main them to consider that the plaintiff, i.e., ‘HALDIRAM,’ dedicated the breach of efficiency.
Cures Sought by the Plaintiff
Haldiram India Pvt. Ltd. initiated authorized proceedings to guard its trademark ‘HALDIRAM’S and its variations, notably ‘HALDIRAM BHUJIAWALA’, beneath the Commerce Marks Act, 1999. The plaintiff seeks to ascertain the ‘well-known’ standing of its mark in accordance with Part 2(1)(zg) of the Act[5]. Moreover, the plaintiff demanded a everlasting injunction in opposition to the defendants, prohibiting them from promoting merchandise beneath the contested marks ‘HALDIRAM’ or ‘HALDIRAM BHUJIWALA’, or some other marks that bear misleading similarity to the plaintiff’s mark ‘HALDIRAM’.
The courtroom’s process was to evaluate the energy and popularity of the Haldiram model, each inside India and on a world scale, and decide whether or not the defendant’s unauthorized use of the same mark infringed upon firm’s mental property rights.
End result of the Dispute
The Delhi Excessive Courtroom dominated in favor of the plaintiff, completely restraining the defendant from utilizing the impugned marks and awarding Haldiram damages of Rs. 50 lakhs and prices of Rs. 2 lakhs.
The courtroom’s resolution was underpinned by a complete evaluation of Haldiram’s model presence and popularity. The courtroom noticed that Haldiram has not solely established a robust presence within the nationwide market however has additionally expanded its affect globally, transcending geographical, cultural, and nationwide boundaries. The courtroom acknowledged Haldiram’s’ “sturdy spill-over popularity,” the place the model’s authenticity and enchantment resonate with a various viewers, even in areas the place the corporate doesn’t have a authorized presence. It is a testomony to the model’s deep reference to India’s wealthy culinary custom and its potential to captivate.
The In depth Scope and Affect of Properly-Recognized Logos
The courtroom emphasised on the importance of popularity and goodwill in declaring a mark as ‘well-known.’
As per part 2 (1) (zg) of the Commerce Marks Act, 1999[6];
“ well- recognized commerce mark’’, in relation to any items or service, means a mark which has turns into so to the substantial phase of the general public which makes use of such items or receives such companies that using such mark in relation to different items or companies can be prone to be taken as indicating a connection in the midst of commerce or rendering of companies between these items or companies and an individual utilizing the mark in relation to the primary talked about items or companies[7]”.
[1] Haldiram India Non-public Restricted vs Berachah Gross sales Company & Ors 2024/DHC/2517
[2] Ibid (n1)
[3] Sunil Prakash, “Passing Off and Infringement of Properly-Recognized Commerce Marrk’s In India”, Worldwide Journal of Legislation, Administration & Humanities, Vol. 1 (2018)
[4] Corporations Act, 2013 Part 16 (1) (b)
[5] Commerce Marks Act, 1999 Part 2 (1) (zg)
[6] Ibid (n5)
[7] Ibid (n5)
