Case Note & Summary
The plaintiff, Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited, filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off against Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and another, seeking to restrain them from using the trademark 'HOM' for restaurant services. The plaintiff claimed to have conceived and adopted the trademark 'House Of Mandarin' in 2016, with registration in Classes 16 and 43 obtained in 2017. The plaintiff's restaurant, launched in 2017 at Bandra and later in 2019 at Powai, became popularly known by the acronym 'HOM'. The plaintiff applied for registration of 'HOM' and 'Asian Bistro by Hom' in 2025. In September 2025, the plaintiff's director received congratulatory messages about a new restaurant 'HOM' opening near its Bandra outlet, leading to discovery that the defendants had adopted the identical mark 'HOM' for their restaurant services. The defendants argued independent adoption, claiming 'HOM' is a Sanskrit word meaning offering into fire, and that they had developed the concept with a marketing agency in November 2024. The court, after hearing both sides, found that the plaintiff had made out a prima facie case of infringement and passing off, as the marks were identical and used for identical services. The court noted that the plaintiff's prior adoption and use of 'HOM' as an acronym for 'House Of Mandarin' was established through newspaper articles and social media posts. The defendants' claim of independent adoption was not bonafide, as they failed to explain why they chose a mark identical to the plaintiff's well-known acronym. The balance of convenience was in favor of the plaintiff, and irreparable loss would be caused if the injunction was not granted. The court granted an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the trademark 'HOM' or any deceptively similar mark, pending the final disposal of the suit.
Headnote
A) Trademark Law - Infringement and Passing Off - Interim Injunction - Plaintiff's prior adoption and use of 'HOM' as acronym for 'House Of Mandarin' in restaurant services - Defendants' adoption of identical mark 'HOM' for same services - Court held that plaintiff made out a prima facie case of infringement and passing off, balance of convenience in favor of plaintiff, and irreparable loss would be caused if injunction not granted - Defendants' claim of independent adoption not bonafide - Injunction granted restraining defendants from using 'HOM' mark (Paras 1-24).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the plaintiff is entitled to an interim injunction restraining the defendants from using the trademark 'HOM' for restaurant services, pending the final disposal of the suit.
Final Decision
Interim injunction granted restraining the defendants, their employees, servants, agents, assigns, and anyone acting on their behalf from using the trademark 'HOM' by itself or in combination with any other word or any other mark deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademarks 'HOM', 'HOM House Of Mandarin', and registered trademark 'HOM House of Mandarin', and from passing off their services as that of the plaintiff, pending the final disposal of the suit.
Law Points
- Trademark infringement
- passing off
- interim injunction
- prima facie case
- balance of convenience
- irreparable loss
- honest concurrent use
- prior adoption and use
- deceptive similarity
- acronym as trademark
