M/s Sangeetha Caterers And Consultants Llp vs M/S NELLAI SANGEETHAS

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(MAD) 10507

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 24.03.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SENTHILKUMAR RAMAMOORTHY C.S.(Comm.Div.) No.140 of 2024 M/s.SANGEETHA CATERERS AND CONSULTANTS LLP Represented by its Designated Partners, 1. Mr.P.Rajagopal
2. Mr.P.Suresh Having their Registered Office at: No.7, Gandhi Nagar, 1^st main road, 4^th floor, Adyar, Chennai-600 020. ... Plaintiff vs.
M/s. NELLAI SANGEETHAS Pure Veg Restaurant Represented by its Proprietor Kodai Road, Near Kodai Road Toll Plaza, Dindigul, Pin Code – 624 206. ... Defendant PRAYER: Plaint filed under Order IV Rule 1 of Original Side Rules and Order VII Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure Read With Section 27, 134 and 135 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 & Proviso 1 of Section 7 of the Commercial Courts act, 2015, prays for the Judgment and Decree against the defendant, as follows:
(A) a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their legal representatives, their successors in business, assigns, franchisees, servants or agents from operating the restaurant business by infringing the plaintiff's registered trademarks “SVR SANGEETHA”, “SVR SANGEETHA VEG. RESTAURANT”, “SANGEETHA (with a VEENA MARK)”, “SANGEETHA VEG. RESTAURANT WITH VEENA MARK” “Sangeetha Veg express (with a Veena Mark)” and “SVR Sangeetha EXPRESS” or by use of confusingly similar or any other mark deceptively and identically similar to the Plaintiff's registered trademark or in any other manner whatsoever;
(B) a permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their legal representatives, their successors in business, assigns, franchisees, servants or agents from operating restaurant business by the name “NELLAI SANGEETHAS Pure Veg Restaurant” or any other similar marks to that of the plaintiff's registered trademark from committing the act of passing off and enabling others in passing off the restaurant business in the deceptively similar mark which is identical to the plaintiff's registered trademark in any manner whatsoever;
(C) the defendant be ordered to surrender to the plaintiff for destruction of all their packing containers, card board boxes, packing materials, covers and carry bags, screen prints, bills, sign boards, billing software, menu cards, and any other material in their possession bearing the mark “NELLAI SANGEETHAS Pure Veg Restaurant” or any other similar marks to that of the plaintiff's registered trademark which is identical to the plaintiff's registered trademark;
(D) directing the defendant to render the rendition of theirs accounts from the date of commencement of their restaurant till the date of filing of the plaint;
(E) the defendant be ordered to pay to the plaintiffs a sum of Rs.10,00,000/- (Rupees Ten Lakhs Only) as damages for their wrongful and illegal act by use of the registered trademark;
(F) for cost of the suit.
For Plaintiff : Mr.L.Rajasekar For Defendant : Set Ex parte on 11.12.2024

J U D G M E N T

The suit was filed for reliefs in respect of alleged infringement of trade mark and passing off. Suit summons was served on the sole defendant on 31.08.2024. Since the defendant failed to enter appearance in spite of receipt of suit summons, by order dated 11.12.2024, the defendant was set ex parte. Thereafter, the plaintiff adduced evidence by examining Mr.P.Suresh, partner of the plaintiff firm, as P.W.1. In course of the ex parte evidence of P.W.1, 32 documents were exhibited as Exs.P1 to P32.

2. Learned counsel for the plaintiff submits that the plaintiff adopted and used the word mark SANGEETHA and related word and device marks since 1990. By referring to Exs.P8 to P13, learned counsel submits that legal use certificates in respect of the plaintiff's trade mark have been placed on record. Learned counsel also submits that invoices relating to services provided by third parties have been placed on record to establish use of the relevant trade marks. He also relies upon Exs.P17 to P19 and submits that these documents provide evidence that the aggregate annual turnover for financial year 2022-2023 is in the region of Rs.300 crores. Learned counsel also referred to the sign board of the defendant's restaurant (Ex.P29) and an invoice issued by the defendant (Ex.P30).

3. Upon examining the evidence placed on record by the plaintiff and on comparing the plaintiff's trade mark with the impugned mark NELLAI SANGEETHAS, it is evident that the impugned mark is deceptively similar. The marks are used in relation to an identical business. No contra evidence has been adduced by the defendant. Therefore, the plaintiff is entitled to the reliefs claimed in paragraph 19(A) to (C) of the plaint. As regards the reliefs claimed in paragraph 19(D) & (E), in the absence of evidence, these reliefs cannot be granted. As the successful party, the plaintiff is also entitled to costs in relation to court fees, reasonable lawyer's fees and expenses.

4. For reasons aforesaid, the suit is decreed in terms of prayers (A), (B) and (C) of paragraph 19 of the plaint. The defendant is also directed to pay a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rupees Two lakhs only) as costs to the plaintiff towards court fees, lawyer's fees and other expenses.

24.03.2025 Index : Yes / No Internet : Yes / No Neutral Citation: Yes / No kj Plaintiff's witness:

P.W.1 – Mr.P.Suresh Documents exhibited by the plaintiff:

Exhibits	Documents
Ex.P1	The photocopy of the Partnership Deed of the Plaintiff dated 22.11.2001. (Compared with original).
Ex.P2	The photocopy of the Copyright Certificate for SVR Sangeetha of the Plaintiff dated 04.09.2002. (Compared with original).
Ex.P3	The photocopy of the Copyright Certificate for Sangeetha with Veena nark of Plaintiff dated 16.01.2004. (Compared with original).
Ex.P4	The photocopy of the Limited Liability Partnership Agreement of Plaintiff dated 01.04.2015. (Compared with original).

Exhibits	Documents

Ex.P5	The printout of the Certificate of Conversion of Plaintiff dated 01.04.2015. (Certificate u/s 63 of BSA produced).
Ex.P6	The photocopy of the Reconstituted Limited Liability Partnership Agreement of Plaintiff dated 01.04.2015. (Compared with original).
Ex.P7	The photocopy of the Communication confirming order passed in Form 24 of Plaintiff dated 17.03.2018. (Compared with original).
Ex.P8	The photocopy of the Legal Use Certificate for TM No. 1441849 dated 23.10.2018. (Compared with original).
Ex.P9	The photocopy of the Legal Use Certificate for TM No. 1441854 dated 23.10.2018. (Compared with original).
Ex.P10	The photocopy of the Legal Use Certificate for TM No.1464536 dated 23.10.2018. (Compared with original).
Ex.P11	The photocopy of the Legal Use Certificate for TM No.1464537 dated 23.10.2018. (Compared with original).
Ex.P12	The photocopy of the Legal Use Certif

Click Here to Read the rest of this document