Old Madras Baking Company Pvt Ltd v. M/s.Suryachandra Enterprises

C.S.(Comm.Div.)No.8 of 2023

The Madras High Court decreed a civil suit filed by Old Madras Baking Company Pvt Ltd against M/s.Suryachandra Enterprises concerning trademark infringement, copyright violation, and passing off. The dispute involved the use of the 'OLD MADRAS BAKING COMPANY' mark across various classes and digital platforms. Crucially, the court accepted a Memo of Compromise and Trademark Assignment Deed signed by both parties, leading to the suit being settled and decreed without costs.

Jurisdiction
India
Court
Madras High Court
Case Number
C.S.(Comm.Div.)No.8 of 2023
Judge(s)
C.Saravanan

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in trademark matters before Madras High Court. Understanding the court's reasoning in Old Madras Baking Company Pvt Ltd vs M/s.Suryachandra Enterprises is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

trademarkCS (COMM) 633/2022

R C Plasto Tanks And Pipes Pvt. LtdvsM/S. Navnath Pipes

The plaintiff, R C Plasto Tanks And Pipes Pvt. Ltd., claimed that the defendant, M/S Navnath Pipes, was infringing its distinctive trademark 'PLASTO/' in relation to plastic pipes and fittings. The dispute arose when the plaintiff discovered the defendant using a deceptively similar mark for manufacturing and selling impugned goods.

trademarkFAO 25/2018 & CAV 41-42/2018, CM APPL. 2153/2018, CM APPL. 2154/2018

Marina Food Products Private LimitedvsBritannia Industries Limited

The Delhi High Court upheld an ex-parte injunction granted by the Trial Court against Marina Food Products Private Limited for using the trademark 'MARIE' in relation to biscuits. The court found that the initial order met the legal requirements under Order 39 Rule 3 of the CPC, as sufficient reasons were recorded regarding potential public confusion and harm. Furthermore, the appeal challenging the jurisdiction of the Delhi Courts was dismissed, confirming the trial court's authority to proceed with the trademark infringement suit.

trademarkC.A.(COMM.IPD-TM) 38/2022

Whirlpool Properties, Inc.vsThe Registrar Of Trade Marks

The Delhi High Court allowed the appeal filed by Whirlpool Properties, Inc. against the Registrar of Trade Marks' refusal of its device mark application. The court found that the coined word 'AFFRESH' was inherently distinctive and not descriptive, thus overcoming objections under Section 9(1)(a). Furthermore, after reviewing cited marks, the court determined that the subject mark was prima facie dissimilar to existing registrations, allowing the registration process to continue.

trademarkCS(COMM) 126/2024

Oikos S.P.A.vsOikos India Pvt Ltd & Anr.

In a dispute over the use of the 'OIKOS' brand, Oikos S.P.A. filed suit against Oikos India Pvt Ltd alleging trademark infringement after its business relationship was terminated. The Defendants contested the claim, challenging the Plaintiff's ownership rights and citing an existing written agreement allowing stock sales. The Delhi High Court addressed the interim injunction application by appointing a Local Commissioner to conduct a thorough inspection of the Defendant's premises, specifically to determine if the infringing products were made from materials supplied by the Plaintiff.

trademark(T)CMA(TM)/1/2023 (OA/104/04/TM/CHN)

M/s.Ghanshyam Perfumery And Co.vsS.Shri Kasim Ramaiah

This Madras High Court case involved a Trade Marks Appeal challenging the rejection of an opposition against Trademark Application No. 582422. The parties, M/s. Ghanshyam Perfumery And Co. and S.Shri Kasim Ramaiah (trading as M/s. Shanker Perfumery Works), reached a comprehensive settlement agreement. Under the terms, they agreed to exclusive rights for 'SONA CHANDI' and other 'SONA formative trademarks,' respectively, while also agreeing not to use deceptively similar labels. The court disposed of the appeal based on these mutual consent terms.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Facing a trademark dispute?

Arctic's TM litigation team handles ~120 trademark matters per year across India, EU, and UK. From oppositions to infringement actions, we build winning arguments from precedent.

Talk to our TM team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar trademark matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call