The Bombay High Court has granted relief to the popular pub chain, Social, in a trademark infringement case against a restaurant named ‘Social Tribe’. The High Court noted that the suffix word ‘TRIBE’ to the word ‘SOCIAL’ did not take away the fact that an attempt was made to infringe the Plaintiff’s mark by coming as close as possible to the registered trade mark.

The High Court was considering an application of Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Private Limited, which has been managing and operating 50 SOCIAL restaurants/bars pan India.

The Single Bench of Justice Sharmila U. Deshmukh held, “The suffix word “TRIBE” to the word “SOCIAL” does not take away the fact that the Defendant had attempted to infringe the Plaintiff’s registered trade mark by coming as close as possible to the registered trade mark. Similarly, use of the colour scheme of pink, orange, yellow is deceptively similar to that of the Plaintiff’s mark. There is also identity in the services provided by Plaintiff and Defendant.”


Advocate Hiren Kamod represented the Plaintiff.

Factual Background

The Applicant Plaintiff, engaged in providing restaurant services, has been managing and operating 50 SOCIAL restaurants/bars pan India. The Plaintiff is a registered proprietor of the trade mark ‘SOCIAL’ and its variants and owns over a hundred registrations for the trade mark ‘SOCIAL’. It was the applicant’s case that it has an active presence on social networking sites under its trade mark ‘SOCIAL’.

In the year 2022, the Plaintiff became aware that the Defendant is operating a restaurant under the registered trade mark ‘SOCIAL TRIBE’ in Mumbai, which is identical to the Plaintiff’s well-known and registered trade mark ‘SOCIAL’ in its entirety as a part of the Defendant’s trade name. As per the plaintiff, a Cease-and-Desist notice was issued to the Defendant, but there was no response. It was submitted that, being the proprietor of a registered trade mark and its formatives, the Plaintiff has the exclusive right to use the same and infringement of the same causes grave harm, loss and prejudice to the Plaintiff, entitling the Plaintiff to a grant of injunctive relief against the Defendant.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the Plaintiff’s trade marks and the defendant’s manner of use, the Bench observed that the Plaintiff’s registered trade mark “SOCIAL” had been copied in its entirety by the Defendant.

Noting that the manner in which Defendant had used the word “SOCIAL” was deceptively similar to the trade mark of the Plaintiff, the Bench found that there was also identity in the services provided by Plaintiff and the Defendant. Thus, the Bench held that the Defendant attempted to infringe the registered trade mark of the Plaintiff.

“The Plaintiff, being the proprietor of the registered trade mark is entitled to exclusive use of the registered trade mark and its formatives, and there are various orders passed by the Delhi High Court in favour of the Plaintiff. A brazen attempt is made by the Defendant to infringe the said trade mark which requires to be restrained. It also cannot be disputed that Plaintiff has robust presence in the restaurant business which is prima facie demonstrated from the sales turn over figures and promotional expenses set out…”, it said.

As per the Bench, if the Defendant was not restrained, despite a prima facie case being made out, the Plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss, harm and prejudice.

Considering that the balance of convenience tilted in favor of the Plaintiff as the Plaintiff is the proprietor of the registered trade mark as well as its formatives, the Bench allowed the Interim Application and passed a temporary order and injunction restraining the Defendants from using any products/ services bearing the Plaintiff’s trade mark ‘SOCIAL’ and its variants.

Cause Title: Impresario Entertainment And Hospitality Private Limited v. M/s. Social Tribe (Cause Title: Interim Application (L) NO. 7092 OF 2024)

Appearance

Petitioner: Advocates Hiren Kamod, Shikha Sachdeva, Rahul Punjabi, Kranav Kapur, Radhika Arora, Annie Jacob, Rahul Punjabi

Click here to read/download Order


Bombay High CourtJustice Sharmila U. Deshmukh

Tulip Kanth

Assistant Editor

Tulip Kanth is an Assistant Editor at Verdictum having over 5 years of experience in the field of legal journalism and editing. She extensively covers judgments of the Supreme Court, High Courts as well as Tribunals. She has previously worked with a legal publishing website where she oversaw the work of other editors and has also created updates on notifications of different Government Ministries. She holds an English Honours Degree from SGTB Khalsa College, Delhi University and has completed her LLB course with specialisation in Corporate Law from Amity University.