{image-28-biriyani-chiken.jpg news.oneindia.in}Chennai, Jun 28: Madras High Court today (Jun 28) prohibited ''Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food'' from using that name or anything deceptively similar to the registered trademark of Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel, Dindigul, in shops or restaurants opened after November 19 2008.

Justice V Ramsubramanian gave the interim order on applications from Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel after getting registration of trademark "Thalappakatti."

In 2007, Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel had sought permanent injunction restraining Thalapakattu Biriyani and fast food from infringing its trademark and restraining them from passing off their products as that of the former.

A Single Judge had granted an injunction restraining Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food from infringing the trademark and passing off on two applications from Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel, Dindigul.

Challenging the common order passed in both applications,the defendant filed two appeals.During hearing,both parties agreed to an interim arrangement, as suggested by the Division Bench, as per which Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food was permitted to change the name to "Chennai Rawther Thalappakattu Biriyani"

Even before institution of this suit, Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel had applied for registration of trademark "Thalappakatti" and Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food had also applied for registration.

On Sept 22,Deputy Registrar,Trade Marks allowed application of Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel and issued certificate.By another order the same day, TBFF's application was refused.

Thalappakatti Naidu Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel filed two fresh applications for injunction where the reliefs were confined to further opening of outlets using the trademark and committing further infringement of the registered trademark.

Justice V Ramasubramanian said it was found plaintiff is registered proprietor of the trademark and that they were its prior user, far ahead in time than use by defendant.

He said defendant's attempt to get the same mark registered had failed. At a time when an interim arrangement was in place, defendant had only four outlets, but started nine more. Since case is one of same marks and not similar ones applied on same type of goods and services, an injunction should follow.

Justice Ramasubramanian said plaintiff has established a prima facie case.Consent by them before a Division Bench to buy peace by way of temporary arrangement appears to have been construed as weakness and misused by the defendant.

Granting limited injunction order in favour of the Dindigul hotel, he restrained Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food Chennai from using "Thalappakattu" in any restaurant or shops opened after Nov 19 2008.

The Judge said the defendant is entitled to use the name for existing four shops as on Nov 19 2008. But benefit of the consent given by Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel would not be available in respect of shops or restaurants opened after the date.

Granting limited injunction order in favour of the Dindigul hotel, he restrained Thalapakattu Biriyani and Fast Food Chennai from using "Thalappakattu" in any restaurant or shops opened after Nov 19 2008.

The Judge said the defendant is entitled to use the name for existing four shops as on Nov 19 2008. But benefit of the consent given by Anandha Vilas Biriyani Hotel would not be available in respect of shops or restaurants opened after the date.

PTI