The Chutney Controversy: Delhi High Court Rules In Favor Of Capital Foods
The Chutney Controversy: Delhi High Court Rules In Favor Of Capital Foods
Introduction
The Delhi High Court addressed important concerns of passing off and trademark infringement in its decision in the case of Capital Foods Private Limited vs Sankalp Recreation Private Limited & Anr. The Court came up with a view that the standard for proving deceptive similarity is lower in this particular case than it is in others since it concerns edible products.
Factual Background
The plaintiff, Capital Foods Private Limited, is a company incorporated in the year 2003 and engaged in manufacturing, marketing, and retailing a wide variety of food products and services. The plaintiff adopted the mark "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY" in the year 2012 and has secured registration of the trademark under Class 30.
Procedural Background
The plaintiff sought grant of permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademark, passing off, dilution, and damages against the defendants. The defendants, Sankalp Recreation Private Limited and Lucrative Impex Pvt. Ltd., were alleged to have unauthorizedly adopted marks similar to the plaintiff's registered trademark.
Issues Involved
1. Trademark Infringement: Whether the defendants' adoption of marks such as "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY", "SCHEZUAN CHUTNEY" constitutes trademark infringement.
2. Passing Off: Whether the defendants' actions amount to passing off their goods and services as those of the plaintiff.
Contentions of the Parties
Plaintiff's Contentions: The plaintiff argued that the defendants' adoption of the impugned marks is dishonest and intended to deceive consumers and divert the plaintiff's customers to their establishments. The plaintiff emphasized their prior adoption and use of the trademark "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY" and its registration.
Defendants' Contentions: The defendants did not appear to contest the suit.
Reasoning and Analysis
A bench of Justice Saurabh Banerjee conducted a detailed analysis of the competing marks and observed that the defendants' marks are deceptively similar and phonetically identical to the plaintiff's registered trademark. Furthermore, the court noted that the defendants have either wholly copied the plaintiff's mark or have just replaced the letter ‘W’ with ‘U’, which is hardly a change when viewed from the eyes of a consumer of average intelligence and imperfect recollection and the consumers are likely to associate the defendants’ product with that of the plaintiff’s.
Final Decision
The Delhi High Court granted an ex parte ad interim injunction in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from using the marks/names "SCHEZWAN CHUTNEY", "SCHEZUAN CHUTNEY" or any other deceptively similar mark. The matter is to be listed before the court on 14 October, 2025.
Law Settled
The decision depicts that any confusion between such products, if allowed to continue, can lead to disastrous consequences on human health. Therefore, the Court has to adopt a more cautious and stringent approach for judging the likelihood of confusion and to exercise greater care.
In this case the plaintiff was represented by Mr. Achuthan Sreekumar, Mr. Rohil Bansal, Mr. Swastik Bisarya, Advocates.
