Invoking Tamil poet Avvaiyar's saying that hunger can make even the ten virtues disappear, the Madras High Court has restrained a Thanjavur restaurant, Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg, from operating under the name “Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg Restaurant”. The court found that customers could mistake it for the Sangeetha Veg Restaurant chain because of the similarity in their names.
Justice P.B. Balaji passed the interim injunction on October 30 in a trademark infringement suit filed by Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP, which operates the Sangeetha Veg Restaurant chain.
The judge quoted Avvaiyar's saying, “Pasi vandhaal pathum parandhu pohum”, which means that when hunger strikes, even the ten virtues will fly away. He also referred to another popular Tamil idiom, “Pasi kanna kattudhu”, which conveys that hunger makes a person blind.
Applying these expressions to the dispute, Justice Balaji reasoned that a hungry customer would be drawn to the restaurant's name rather than notice differences in spelling, logos or colour schemes.
“A customer would easily be deceived by the name of the Respondent and would be blind to the colour scheme, spelling, viz., omission of an 'e', use of 'Hotel' as a prefix or even the device marks and is very likely to be carried away by the name and only associate it with the Applicant,” the court observed.
The dispute arose after the restaurant chain accused Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg of dishonestly adopting a deceptively similar name. It alleged that the move was intended to make customers believe that the Thanjavur establishment was associated with its business.
The chain traces its origins to 1985, when its first Hotel Sangeetha Veg Restaurant outlet was established at Parry Corner in Chennai. It told the court that it held registrations for several marks, including “SVR Sangeetha”, “Sangeetha Veg Restaurant SVR” and “Sangeetha VEG Express”.
Opposing the injunction, the Thanjavur restaurant argued that the competing marks were distinguishable. It pointed to the additional words and prefixes or suffixes in the chain's trademarks. It also relied on differences between the logos and colour schemes, including the use of a Veena device by the chain and a wheel and conch device by the restaurant.
It also argued that the chain had no outlet in Thanjavur and there was little likelihood of customers confusing the two businesses.
Rejecting these arguments, Justice Balaji noted that the restaurant had omitted an 'e' from the English spelling of Sangeetha. However, it had reproduced the name identically in its Tamil signage.
The judge also noted that the restaurant was located opposite the Brihadeeswara Temple, popularly known as the Big Temple. The temple attracts visitors from across India and abroad, making it possible for customers familiar with the established chain to mistake the Thanjavur restaurant for one of its outlets.
The absence of a Sangeetha outlet in Thanjavur therefore had no material bearing on the likelihood of confusion, the court held. The chain had established branches across Tamil Nadu, other parts of India and overseas.
The court further noted that the Thanjavur restaurant had started using the mark only recently and had no trademark registrations in place. It found that the adoption was not honest or bona fide.
Finding that the chain had satisfied all three tests for interim relief, namely prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable loss and hardship, the court allowed the application.
The injunction restrains the restaurant from operating under the name “Hotel Sangethas Pure Veg Restaurant” or any other similar name pending disposal of the suit.
For Applicant: Advocate L Rajasekar
For Respondent: Advocate Adith Narayan Vijayaraghavan