Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief To Haveli Restaurants, Bars "Punjabi Haveli" From Using "Haveli" Mark

The Delhi High Court, in interim-relief to the popular restaurant chain Haveli, has granted an ex-parte ad interim injunction against a Ludhiana-based company "Punjabi Haveli" refraining it from using the mark "Haveli".

The Court was considering an Application under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 Civil Procedure Code seeking ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of the Plaintiff-Haveli Restaurants against the Defendant-Punjabi Haveli.

The single judge bench of Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora observed, " .....the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case for grant of an ex parte ad-interim injunction against the Defendant. The balance of convenience also lies in favour of the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff will suffer irreparable loss in case the Defendant is not restrained from the using the impugned trade mark/trade name."

The Applicant was represented by Advocate Rishi Bansal.

The Plaintiff argued that it has consistently and extensively utilized the mark HAVELI and its derivatives in commerce since 2001, firmly establishing it as a distinctive identifier of origin for its goods and services in the food and hospitality sector. It was submitted that the Plaintiff has employed its HAVELI trademark in a distinctive and visually recognizable manner across trade dress, packaging, branding materials, websites and promotional content under Classes 16, 29, 30, 31, 35 and 43 and it is prominently represented in English, Punjabi, and Hindi, reinforcing its cultural significance and widespread recognition.

It was contended that the Plaintiff has been continuously using these original artistic elements in the course of trade, ensuring their association with the Plaintiff’s goods and services and by virtue of this use, the Plaintiff has accrued valuable goodwill, recognition, and reputation in the market. It was averred in the plaint, that the Plaintiff holds superior rights in the HAVELI mark under the well-established principles of 'prior use', by virtue of prior and uninterrupted use, which grants proprietary rights to the first commercial use of a mark, irrespective of formal registration. 

It was their case that the Defendant has only recently sought to register the mark PUNJABI HAVELI on a 'proposed to be used' basis. It was averred that around the year 2021, the Plaintiff and Defendant entered into discussions regarding a potential business arrangement, wherein the Defendant's premises was proposed to be absorbed into the Plaintiff's chain of establishments. The Plaintiff, in good faith, had shared certain conceptual, business, and aesthetic insights with the Defendant during the course of these discussions. However, the said deal did not materialize, and no agreement or understanding was ever finalized or executed between the parties. 

It was submitted that the Defendant, despite having no rights, authorization, or consent from the Plaintiff, proceeded to undertake renovations and rebranding of its premises, deliberately incorporating distinctive and recognizable aspects of the Plaintiff's restaurants' key elements and thematic design. It was contended that the Defendant adopted and replicated Plaintiff's cultural theme, artistic layout, visual motifs, color schemes, interior designs, and most significantly, the overall ambience of the Plaintiff's establishments running under the name and brand of HAVELI.

It was contended that the Defendant continues to operate its restaurant in this deceptive manner which causes a recurring injury to the Plaintiff's goodwill and a continued erosion of the distinctiveness that the Plaintiff has built around its brand and business over the years. 

The Court observed that from a visual comparison of the Plaintiff’s trademarks and the Defendant’s impugned mark, it is evident that the Defendant has made an attempt to create an impression that the goods and services provided by the Defendant under the impugned mark are associated with the Plaintiff.

"In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the prima facie opinion that the impugned mark of the Defendant is identical to the trademarks of the Plaintiff, and the Defendant has copied all the features of the Plaintiff’s trademarks with a sole intention to unlawfully ride upon the of Plaintiff’s goodwill and reputation. The Plaintiff in the plaint has placed on record the screenshot(s) of the social media post, which shows that customers while referring to Defendant’s restaurant has tagged the Plaintiff’s official social media page", the Court observed.

 The matter has been listed for February 17, 2026.

Cause Title: Haveli Restaurant and Resorts Ltd. vs. Adison Resorts Limited

Appearances:

Petitioner- Advocate Rishi Bansal, Advocate Akash Chaudhary and Advocate Mankaran Singh Ahluwalia

Click here to read/ download Order