The Bombay High Court has placed a temporary restraint on a Pune-based eatery from utilizing the ‘Burger King’ name, in an ongoing trademark dispute with the American fast-food giant, Burger King Corporation. This interim order, effective immediately, was announced on Monday by a division bench consisting of Justices A S Chandurkar and Rajesh Patil, pending a detailed hearing and final resolution of the case.
The legal contention began when Burger King Corporation filed a plea in August challenging a Pune court decision that dismissed its lawsuit alleging trademark infringement. The multinational accused the Pune eatery, owned by Anahita Irani and Shapoor Irani, of misusing its trademarked name ‘Burger King,’ which led to the corporation seeking an interim injunction to halt the eatery’s use of the name while the appeal is under consideration.
The High Court had previously upheld an ad-interim order from January 2012 by the Pune court, which initially restrained the local eatery from using the ‘Burger King’ name. “Until then, the interim order is required to be continued,” stated the High Court, emphasizing the necessity to examine all evidence thoroughly during the appeal process.
Further to its order, the High Court has expedited the hearing of the appeal and mandated both parties to maintain records of their financial transactions and tax documents from the past decade until the disposition of the appeal.
In its suit, Burger King Corporation argued that the Pune eatery’s use of the name was inflicting significant financial losses and damaging its brand reputation and goodwill, particularly as the company operates over 400 outlets in India, including six in Pune alone. The US-based fast-food chain entered the Indian market much later than the establishment of the Pune eatery in 1992, which the local court previously noted in its dismissal of the 2011 suit filed by the corporation.
The corporation’s counsel, Hiren Kamod, contended that the prior ruling misjudged the scenario by not considering the broader implications of trademark infringement, despite the earlier establishment of the local eatery.
