Delhi High Court Grants Ad-Interim Injunction to Capital Foods Against Trademark Infringement of 'SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY' by Pitambari Products - 2025-07-28

Protecting the Flavor: Delhi High Court Restrains Misuse of 'SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY' Trademark

The Delhi High Court has issued a significant ad-interim injunction against Pitambari Products Private Limited, reinforcing the intellectual property rights of Capital Foods Private Limited. In a battle over the iconic culinary branding of "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY," the court has taken a decisive stand to protect a registered trademark that has become synonymous with the Plaintiff’s unique product offerings.

A Recipe for Disputes

The legal saga began when Capital Foods, a prominent player in the fast-moving consumer goods (FMCG) sector—now associated with the Tata Group—sought urgent relief from the High Court. The Plaintiff, which has been manufacturing and marketing a variety of sauces, dips, and spreads for over two decades, claimed that its registered trademark "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY" (Registration no. 2431851) was being copied by Pitambari Products.

Capital Foods asserted that they invested significantly in research to develop their specific recipe and identity for this product since 2012. Conversely, the Defendant argued in its correspondence that the mark was merely descriptive and did not warrant protection as a trademark, a defense the High Court scrutinized in light of previous judicial observations.

The Clash of Claims

The Plaintiff argued that its brand, "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY," had acquired "secondary significance" through years of extensive use, massive promotional expenditure—totalling ₹15.99 crores in 2025 alone—and a staggering turnover of nearly ₹186.77 crores for that product line in the last fiscal year.

Mr. Pravin Anand, counsel for the Plaintiff, pointed to a precedent set by a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in Capital Foods Private Limited v. Radiant Indus Chem Pvt. Ltd. , which had already acknowledged the secondary meaning associated with the mark. Despite receiving a cease-and-desist notice earlier this year, the Defendant continued its sale of competing products, leading to this legal intervention.

Judicial Reasoning: Defining Secondary Significance

Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, after personally comparing the products side-by-side, found that the Defendant’s mark was identical to the Plaintiff's registered trademark.

The court emphasized that the legal debate regarding the mark being "descriptive" had been previously addressed by the Division Bench. By aligning with the established stance that the mark has transitioned beyond a mere description of ingredients into a distinct brand identifier, the court effectively dismissed the Defendant’s primary hurdle.

Key Observations

The judgment underscores the court's commitment to protecting established brands from dilution:

• "The Plaintiff is the registered owner of the word mark SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY and it has a copyright registration as well in the artistic work."
• "The Division Bench of this Court in its order dated 25.01.2023 has observed that prima facie the trademark of the Plaintiff SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY has acquired secondary significance."
• "In the facts of this case, the impugned mark of the Defendant is identical to the registered mark of the Plaintiff."
• "Accordingly, the Plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for grant of an ad-interim ex-parte injunction."

The Verdict and Its Impact

In the final order, the High Court restrained Pitambari Products and its associates from using the mark "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY" or any deceptively similar marks. This order acts as a significant check on market players who attempt to "free-ride" on the established reputation of industry leaders.

The court has scheduled the next hearing for December 16, 2025, where it will further deliberate on the status of remaining stocks and permanent injunction requests. For now, the ruling serves as a clear warning that intellectual property rights in the food industry, especially for brands with high consumer recall, will be strictly upheld by the judiciary.