Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Mad) 73710
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
N.Senthilkumar, J
Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP – Appellant
Versus
Sangeetham House of Veg – Respondent
OP (TM) No.23 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: P.Rakesh Kumar
For the Respondents: S.Deenathayalan, S.Jayaharan, Ramalingam & Associates
A trademark registration obtained by suppressing the facts of a court decree and a joint compromise agreement to cease using a deceptively similar mark is liable to be cancelled and the register rectified.
Headnote:The petitioner filed a petition under Sections 47 and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, seeking to rectify the Trademark Register by cancelling the marks 'SANGEETHAM HOUSE OF VEG' (Certificate No. 3477530 and No. 5913237). The petitioner, having established a restaurant business since 1985 with multiple registered trademarks, had previously obtained a decree in C.S. No. 235 of 2024 based on a Joint Compromise Memo dated 25.03.2024, wherein the first respondent agreed to change its restaurant name to 'Hotel Raagam - House of Veg'. However, it was discovered that the first respondent registered the impugned marks on 03.05.2024, allegedly suppressing the court proceedings. The court examined whether the registration of the impugned marks by the first respondent was sustainable given the prior court decree. The central issue was the first respondent's failure to adhere to the terms of the Joint Compromise Memo, which explicitly required a name change and the abandonment of the mark 'Sangeetham'. The court reasoned that since a decree was already passed based on a voluntary agreement to cease use of the similar mark, the subsequent registration obtained by suppressing these facts was improper. This petition is allowed and the second respondent shall remove, expunge or/and cancel the Trademark SANGEETHAM HOUSE OF VEG bearing Certificate No.3477530 and Trademark No.5913237 forthwith.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. claim of trademark infringement based on prior usage and a subsequent compromise agreement to change a deceptively similar name. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. defense based on bona fide application and official grant of registration by the trademark registry. (Para 5) |
| 3. registration obtained by suppressing judicial decrees and compromise terms is invalid and requires rectification. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. cancellation of impugned trademarks to align the registry with judicial mandates. (Para 10) |
ORDER
This petition has been filed to rectify the Trademark Register of the second respondent by removing, expunging or/and cancelling the Trademark SANGEETHAM HOUSE OF VEG bearing Certificate No.3477530 and Trademark No.5913237.
2.The brief facts of the petitioner are as follows:
The petitioner is a Limited Liability Partnership Firm and the same was floated in the year 2015 and was registered with the Registrar of Companies vide Conversion Certificate bearing LLP AAD-7003 dated 01.04.2015 and the same was reconstituted on 01.04.2017, 01.04.2021 and 01.04.2022 vide various Deeds. One of the Designated Partners Mr.P.Suresh, had established Hotel Sangeetha Veg Restaurant in the year 1985, having its first outlet at No.53, Armenian Street, Parrys Corner, Chennai 600 001. Thereafter, the petitioner firm had inducted 2 more partners, namely Ms.Sanjana Suresh and Mr.Anirudh Rajagopal into the
petitioner firm vide a Reconstituted Partnership Deed dated 01.04.2022. All the trademarks which stood in the name of the Partnership Firm were sought to be registered in the name of the subsequent owner viz. M/s.Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP, the petitioner herein by submitting Form 24 dated 19.02.2016 before the Registrar of Trademarks on 22.02.2016 and the same was allowed vide a communication from the registry dated 17.03.2018 informing that the application for change of ownership is allowed for the below mentioned trademarks, which are the details of the certificates for registration of Trade Marks under Class 42:
| Sl.Nos. | Trade Mark Certificate | Class | Symbol |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | 1441849 | 42 | SVR Sangeetha |
| 2. | 1464536 | 42 | Sangeetha Veg. Restaurant SVR |
| 3. | 1441854 | 42 | Sangeetha (Device of Veena) |
| 4. | 1464537 | 42 | Sangeetha Veg Restaurant (Device of Veena Mark) |
| 5. | 4877037 | 43 | Sangeetha VEG Express |
| 6. | 4877039 | 43 | SVR Sangeetha EXPRESS |
3.Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the first respondent's restaurant is located in Thiruchendur with a malafide intention to pass off the first respondent's foods as that of the petitioner foods. The first respondent has named the restaurant as “SANGEETHAM” by adding the letter “M” after the word “SANGEETHA”, below which in a small font, the first respondent had added the words “House of Veg”. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that in the Restaurant Name Board, the logo “S” is also used in a deceptively similar manner to that of the petitioner's registered Trademark SANGEETHA (with a VEENA MARK) bearing Registration No.1464537, thus causing infringement of the petitioner's registered Trade Mark. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that on verification of the official website of the Trade Mark Registry, the petitioner came to know that the first respondent had filed an application for registration of his restaurant's name in the Trade Mark Registry. Therefore, the petitioner was constrained to file a suit in C.S. No.235 of 2024 before this Court to restrain the first respondent from infringing the registered Trade Mark of the petitioner. This Court vide order dated 23.02.2024 in O.A. No.121 of 2024 had granted an order of interim injunction restraining the first respondent from
infringing the registered trademark of the petitioner as well as from using the impugned mark.
4.Learned counsel for the petitioner would further submit that pursuant to the fact that the first respondent had agreed to change the name of their restaurant, the petitioner and the first respondent had entered into a Joint Compromise Memo date
