In a trademark infringement suit, the Delhi High Court has granted relief to the famous Pizza Eatery Domino’s by directing the food delivery Companies Swiggy and Zomato to delist restaurants operating under the names of Dominic Pizza, Domindo Pizza.

The High Court was considering a suit filed on behalf of the plaintiff- Domino’s seeking a permanent injunction restraining infringement of trademark, passing off, dilution of trademarks, trade name, rendition of accounts of profit & damages.

The Single Bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna held, “Defendant nos. 1 to 5, its proprietors, partners, directors, officers, servants, agents, franchisers and all others acting for and it behalf, are restrained from advertising, selling, offering for sale, marketing etc. any product, packaging, menu cards and advertising material, labels, stationery articles, website or any other documentation using, depicting, displaying in any manner whatsoever, the marks/names “Dominic Pizza”, ‘Domindo Pizza’, or any other mark, which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s registered marks…”



Advocate Pravin Anand represented the Plaintiff.

Arguments

It was the case of Domino’s that it was founded way back in 1960 and is now the world's leading pizza and fast food restaurant chains. It was submitted that coupled with the widespread publicity, the prior adoption and extensive use of the trademarks “Domino’s” and “Domino’s Pizza” as well as the red and blue color scheme, the plaintiff has exclusive rights under common law to use the said marks and to prevent misuse of the same by any third party.

It was the plaintiff’s case that the defendants are various entities who have unauthorizedly adopted trade names and marks being “Dominic” and defendant no. 5 has adopted a deceptively similar tradename ‘Domindo’ to that of plaintiffs’ current trademark. It was further submitted that upon preliminary search, the plaintiffs discovered that such entities, which are phonetically identical to plaintiffs’ erstwhile tradename and have tradenames, which are visually deceptively similar to the plaintiffs, are enlisted with defendant no. 6, i.e., Zomato and defendant no. 1l, i.e., Swiggy.As per analysis, such listings are easily enabled due to the prompts provided by Zomato and Swiggy once the first three to five letters of the plaintiff's tradename and mark, which are ‘DOM’, ‘DOMI,’ and ‘DOMIN, ’ are typed on their search bars. It was also claimed that the defendants have deliberately listed themselves online with a name that is identical to the plaintiff's erstwhile name or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s current tradename and trademark to gain maximum momentum and reach to consumers via Swiggy and Zomato.

Reasoning

On a perusal of the factual background and the submissions made by the Plaintiffs, the Bench held that the Plaintiffs demonstrated a prima facie case for the grant of an injunction. “...in case, no ex-parte ad-interim injunction is granted, the plaintiffs will suffer an irreparable loss. Further, balance of convenience also lies in favour of the plaintiffs, and against the defendants”, it held.

Thus, till the next date of hearing, the Bench directed that the Defendants would be restrained from advertising, selling, offering for sale, marketing etc. any product, packaging, menu cards and advertising material, labels, stationery articles, website or any other documentation using, depicting, displaying in any manner whatsoever, the marks/names “Dominic Pizza”, ‘Domindo Pizza’, or any other mark, which is identical or deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s registered marks.

The Bench further directed Zomato and Swiggy to de-list the impugned listings of the four defendants.

Cause Title: Dominos IP Holder LLC & Anr. v. M/s Dominic Pizza & Ors. (Case No.: CS(COMM) 231/2025)

Appearance:

Plaintiff: Advocates Pravin Anand, Shantanu Sahay, Imon Roy

Click here to read/download Order





Delhi High CourtJustice Mini Pushkarna

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.