$~

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CS(COMM) 480/2024 & I.A. 31014/2024 Reserved on: 17th November, 2025 Date of Decision: 24th March, 2026 Date of uploading: As per digital signature BRITANNIA INDUSTRIES LIMITED .....Plaintiff Through: Mr. Sachin Gupta, Ms. Mahima, Ms.

Prashansa Singh, Ms. Diksha Tekriwal and Mr, Rohit Pradhan, Advocates versus RAJAT CHAWLA SOLE PROPRIETOR OF MADHVE GLOBAL ENTERPRISES .....Defendant Through: Mr. Divyanshu Choudhary and Mr.

Kartik Kumar Aggarwal, Advocates.

%

CORAM:

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA

J U D G M E N T

MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J:

I.A. 31014/2024 (under Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2 CPC)

1. The present application has been filed under Section 94 read with Order XXXIX Rules 1 and 2, and Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 [‘CPC’], seeking a temporary injunction against the Defendant.

2. The underlying suit has been filed by the Plaintiff inter alia seeking the relief of permanent injunction and other ancillary reliefs to restrain the

Defendant from using the mark [‘impugned

mark’].

CASE SET UP IN THE PLAINT

3. The Plaintiff is a leading food products company in India. The Plaintiff’s product portfolio primarily comprises bakery products, such as biscuits, bread, and cake, and dairy products, such as cheese and milk.

3.1. The Plaintiff adopted the mark ‘BRITANNIA’ as a trademark and tradename at least since 1918. The wordmark ‘BRITANNIA’ has been declared as a well-known mark by the registry on 08.01.2024. Additionally, the Plaintiff also has copyright registrations, which have been set out at paragraph ‘42’ of the plaint.

3.2. In particular, in 2018, the Plaintiff adopted the trademark

bearing TM no. 3827311 in class 29 and TM no.

3827312 in class 30, both dated 08.05.2018¹. It is stated that the said mark is advertised by the Plaintiff in the marketing and sale of all of its products, including but not limited to 50-50, Good Day, Marie Gold, Britannia Bourbon, and Pure Magic, which are household names in India.

3.3. On 08.08.2023, the Plaintiff applied for and was granted registration of a blank device mark bearing TM No. 6056657 in class

30.

1 Details of Plaintiff’s various BRITANNIA registrations have been set out at paragraph ‘13’ of the plaint.

3.4. The Plaintiff’s revenue for the financial year 2022 to 2023 was approximately Rs. 16,000 crores. The advertising and marketing expenses incurred by the Plaintiff for the promotion of products from 2012 to 2023 have exceeded Rs. 12,000 crores.

3.5. The Plaintiff actively promotes its business through its official website https://www.britannia.co.in/ as well as through various social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, etc.

3.6. Owing to the Plaintiff’s goodwill and wide reputation not only in India but globally², it has won various accolades and awards, which have been set out in paragraph ‘9’ of the plaint.

3.7. In March 2024, the Plaintiff learnt that the Defendant was using the impugned mark and had applied for registration thereof in Class 30, claiming use since 10.10.2022.

3.8. Thereafter, the Plaintiff issued a cease-and-desist notice dated 13.03.2024 to the Defendant; however, the Defendant vide its response dated 15.04.2024 refused to comply with the notice whilst stating that the rival marks are dissimilar. Thus, aggrieved by the same, the Plaintiff has instituted the present petition.

SUBMISSIONS BY THE PARTIES Submissions by the Plaintiff

4. Mr. Sachin Gupta, learned counsel for the Plaintiff, states that the Plaintiff’s trademarks consist of a highly distinctive and unique device with a five-sided pentagon-like stylised/curvaceous structure with arches at the bottom joining from both corners in the middle of the structure [‘geometric

2 Details of the Plaintiff’s international trademark registrations have been set out at paragraph ‘26’ of the

plaint.

pentagonal structure’]. He states that a bare perusal of the Plaintiff’s mark and the impugned mark demonstrates that the essential features and distin