Monday, June 10, 2024

Dominos IP Holder Vs MG Foods

Ex-Parte Ad Interim Injunction Granted in Favor of Domino's in Trademark Infringement Case Against MG Foods

The plaintiffs, Domino’s IP Holder, have successfully secured an ex-parte ad interim injunction against MG Foods for trademark infringement. The plaintiffs, renowned for their “DOMINO’S” mark since 1965, have established an extensive global presence with over 20,500 stores in more than 90 countries. In India, Domino's maintains a robust online ordering platform through their domain www.dominos.co.in, operational since 2007.

The plaintiffs raised concerns regarding the activities of defendant No.1, MG Foods, which has been operating in various regions of Punjab, specifically Jalandhar, Nakodar, Goraya, and Mehatpur. The defendant was found to be using a phonetically and visually similar mark, ‘DONITO’S,’ to sell identical products such as pizzas and burgers. This similarity has led to allegations of trademark infringement.

Hon'ble Judge Anish Dayal, presiding over the case, found sufficient grounds to grant the plaintiffs’ request for an ex-parte ad interim injunction. The court acknowledged that the plaintiffs had established a prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favored them. Additionally, the court noted that the plaintiffs would likely suffer irreparable harm if the injunction was not granted.

As a result, the court issued an ex-parte ad interim injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, prohibiting the defendants from using the deceptively similar mark ‘DONITO’S’ until the next hearing. This order aims to prevent any further potential harm to the plaintiffs' brand and business operations.

Case Title: Dominos IP Holder Vs MG Foods
Judgment/Order Date: 31.05.2024
Case No. CS(COMM) 517/2024
Neutral Citation: NA
Name of Court: Delhi High Court
Name of Hon'ble Judge: Anish Dayal, H.J.

Disclaimer:

Ideas, thoughts, views, information, discussions and interpretation expressed herein are being shared in the public Interest. Readers' discretion is advised as these are subject to my subjectivity and may contain human errors in perception, interpretation and presentation of the fact and issue involved herein.

Written by:Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman
IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney]
United & United
Ph No: 9990389539

No comments:

Post a Comment

Featured Post

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING

WHETHER THE REGISTRAR OF TRADEMARK IS REQUIRED TO BE SUMMONED IN A CIVIL SUIT TRIAL PROCEEDING IN ORDER TO PROVE THE TRADEMARK  REGISTRA...

My Blog List

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

IPR UPDATE BY ADVOCATE AJAY AMITABH SUMAN

Search This Blog