The High Court of Delhi has confirmed a significant interim injunction against Jabsons Foods Pvt. Ltd., effectively barring the snack manufacturer from using the mark "HOT MIX" in connection with its range of namkeen and associated snack products. Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav, presiding over the commercial division, ruled that the plaintiff, Sunit Shah, proprietor of Shah Namkeen, had demonstrated a strong prima facie case for trademark infringement and passing off, necessitating the continuation of the protective order originally granted in August 2024.

The dispute originated in June 2024, when Shah Namkeen identified that Jabsons Foods had begun marketing snack packets under the "HOT MIX" label. Shah, who has operated under the trade name since 1977, asserted that his company had consistently used the "SHAH HOT MIX" label as a core brand identifier. In his arguments before the court, Shah emphasized that "HOT MIX" constituted the dominant and essential feature of his registered label, noting that its distinctive placement and bold lettering had cultivated significant consumer recognition over several decades. Jabsons Foods, in its defense, contended that "HOT MIX" was a descriptive term characterizing the spicy nature of their snacks and argued that it could not be monopolized by any single trader. The defendant further claimed that its own house mark, "JABSONS," combined with unique packaging designs, sufficiently distinguished its products from those of the plaintiff to prevent any likelihood of confusion in the marketplace.

However, the Court rejected the argument that "HOT MIX" was a purely descriptive expression requiring no protection. Justice Kaurav observed that the expression does not exist in standard dictionaries as a conventional name for a specific type of namkeen. In his judgment, the presiding judge remarked: “The expression HOT MIX is not to be found in any dictionary as the name of a namkeen, nor has the defendant placed on record any material, be it a dictionary, culinary literature or trade literature, to show that, when the plaintiff adopted it, HOT MIX was the recognised name of any particular variety of namkeen.” Consequently, the court held that Jabsons Foods had utilized the mark as a primary brand identity rather than a mere descriptor, particularly given the prominent display of the words on their packaging.

Evidence presented by the plaintiff underscored the substantial longevity and commercial presence of the brand. Financial documents, including invoices and marketing materials dating back to the 1990s, established that Shah Namkeen had built a robust business around the mark. In contrast, records provided by Jabsons Foods indicated that the defendant only commenced using the "HOT MIX" label in October 2023. The court noted that Jabsons had successfully marketed hundreds of other snack variants for over fifteen years without resorting to the contested mark, casting doubt on the necessity of their recent adoption of the expression. Furthermore, the court held that Jabsons failed to provide adequate evidence that "HOT MIX" was common to the trade. While the defendant produced photographs of packaging from other minor manufacturers, the court found these insufficient, noting that a proprietor is not obligated to pursue every petty infringer when the primary threat to the business arises from a major market competitor.

The judicial analysis relied heavily on the " anti-dissection rule ," which mandates that marks be viewed in their entirety while acknowledging that dominant features hold greater weight in commercial impressions. The Court held that even the addition of a house mark such as "JABSONS" does not absolve a competitor of liability if the essential feature of a registered, distinctive mark has been appropriated. Namkeen, being an everyday consumer commodity often sold in small, low-priced packets, is typically purchased by name without extensive scrutiny of the packaging get-up. The court emphasized that the standard consumer is not expected to be "gifted with the powers of observation of a Sherlock Holmes," and thus, the risk of confusion remained high.

Addressing the potential for irreparable harm, the court determined that the balance of convenience favored the plaintiff. The injunction specifically restrains Jabsons Foods from manufacturing, advertising, or selling namkeen products using the "HOT MIX" mark or any deceptively similar expression. However, the ruling provides a clear path forward for the defendant to continue its business operations. The Court clarified that Jabsons Foods is not precluded from using its own established house mark, nor is it barred from utilizing the words "hot" or "mix" individually in their standard, dictionary-based descriptive sense, provided they are not employed as a product title, mark, or label that mimics the plaintiff’s protected brand.

This decision serves as a crucial clarification on the limitations of descriptive defenses in trademark litigation, particularly for brands that have acquired secondary meaning through extensive use. By protecting the "HOT MIX" expression as a distinctive component of Shah Namkeen’s label, the court has prioritized the commercial goodwill built by original adopters against late-entrant competitors seeking to capitalize on established market identification. The lawsuit will now proceed toward final adjudication, with the matter currently scheduled for a follow-up appearance before the Joint Registrar on December 7, 2026. The interim injunction will remain in force throughout the duration of these proceedings, ensuring the status quo is maintained for the plaintiff’s brand identity.