Indian Express Vs. Fundamental Hospitality

Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited, operating restaurants under the registered trademark "House of Mandarin" since 2016 and claiming popular use of its acronym "HOM" from 2017, filed a suit for trademark infringement and passing off against Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and another, who adopted "HOM" (derived from Sanskrit for fire offering) for their modern Indian restaurant launched in October 2025 near the plaintiff's Bandra outlet, after the plaintiff became aware in September 2025 via congratulatory messages mistaking it as their expansion. The interim application for injunction was heard finally with consent. The court reasoned that the plaintiff failed to provide cogent evidence, such as extensive media references, customer reviews, or consistent public domain use over eight years, to show "HOM" was popularly associated with them in the public mind, thus no extension of statutory protection from the registered mark to the unregistered acronym under the Trade Marks Act, distinguishing from Mahindra & Mahindra where long-term evidence existed; for passing off, the plaintiff lacked proof of standalone goodwill in "HOM," misrepresentation by defendants (whose adoption was honest and bona fide from November 2024), or likelihood of confusion among discerning premium customers, given different cuisines (Pan-Asian vs. Indian), stylized marks, and unreliable evidence like undated materials and unsubstantiated WhatsApp chats. The court dismissed the interim application, finding no prima facie case.

• The benefit of use and registration of a trade mark inures to its natural abbreviation only if the abbreviation is used to such an extent that the general public and trade recognize the plaintiff by it, making it a brand identifier associated solely with the plaintiff in the public mind: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another, Para 18 (relying on Mahindra & Mahindra Limited vs. MNM Marketing Pvt. Ltd., 2014 SCC OnLine Bom 1343).
• An abbreviation becomes a protectable trade mark if, through use by customers, trade, or media, it is identified in the public mind with a particular company, even without formal use by the company itself: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another, Para 16 (citing McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition).
• In a passing off action, the plaintiff must prove goodwill or reputation in the mark, misrepresentation by the defendant, and likelihood of damage; intent to deceive is not necessary, but likelihood of confusion or deception is required, and goods need not be identical if misrepresentation affects the plaintiff's reputation: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another, Para 25 (relying on Pernod Ricard India Private Limited vs. Karanveer Singh Chhabra Trading, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1701).
• Passing off is a tort of deceit distinguished from confusion, where deception involves false representation but confusion may arise without lies; factors for deceptive similarity include mark nature, resemblance, goods nature, purchaser class, purchase mode, and surrounding circumstances: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another, Paras 26-27 (relying on Parker Knoll Limited vs. Knoll International Ltd., 1962 RPC 265; Cadila Health Care Ltd. vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., (2001) 5 SCC 73).
• Common law rights in passing off are broader than infringement, unaffected by non-registration, and protect goodwill against misrepresentation causing consumer confusion: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another, Para 24 (relying on Syed Mohideen vs. P. Sulochana Bai, (2016) 2 SCC 683).

Case Title: Indian Express and Commercial Ventures and Projects Private Limited Vs. Fundamental Hospitality Private Limited and Another Order date: December 19, 2025 Case Number: Interim Application (L) No.35432 of 2025 in Commercial IP (L) No.35330 of 2025 Neutral Citation: N/A Name of court: High Court of Judicature at Bombay Name of Judge: Sharmila U. Deshmukh

[Readers are advised not to treat this as substitute for legal advise as it may contain errors in perception, interpretation, and presentation] [Written By: Advocate Ajay Amitabh Suman, IP Adjutor [Patent and Trademark Attorney], High Court of Delhi]