Update Case Entry

Manually curate individual case documents inside the PostgreSQL engine.

Case Lawsuit Title *

Case / Trial ID Number

Jurisdiction Code *

Category *

Filing Date

Decision Verdict Date

Court / Tribunal

Bench / Panel Judges

Petitioner / Claimant (Plaintiff)

Respondent / Defendant

Dispute Summary

Outcome / Ruling

Verdict Document PDF URL

Full text judgment

[Cites
6
, Cited by
0
]
Delhi High Court - Orders
Lite Bite Foods Private Limited vs Jaspal Kaur on 28 April, 2026
Author:
Tushar Rao Gedela
Bench:
Tushar Rao Gedela
$~35
              *         IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
              +         CS(COMM) 448/2026
                        LITE BITE FOODS PRIVATE LIMITED              .....Plaintiff
                                      Through: Mr. Manish Dhir, Ms. S. Gomes, Mr.
                                                Pankaj Kumar and Mr. Sukhpreet
                                                Singh, Advocates.

versus

JASPAL KAUR                                                                               .....Defendant
                                                      Through:

CORAM:
                        HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
                                                      ORDER
%                                       28.04.2026
              I.A. 11793/2026 (Additional Documents)
1.        The present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff under
              Order XI Rule 1(4)
of the Code of Civil Procedure
, 1908 (hereinafter referred
              to as'
CPC
') as applicable to commercial suits under the
Commercial Courts
              Act, 2015
(hereinafter referred to as '
CC Act
') seeking leave to place on record
              additional documents.
2.        The plaintiff is permitted to file additional documents in accordance with
              the provisions of the
CC Act
and the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules,
              2018.
3.        Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
I.A. 11791/2026 (Pre-institution mediation)
4.        This is an application filed by the plaintiff seeking exemption from
              instituting pre-litigation mediation under
Section 12A
of the CC Act.
5.        As the present matter contemplates urgent interim relief, in light of the
              judgment of the Supreme Court in
Yamini Manohar vs. T.K.D. Keerthi
:
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                   Page 1 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               (2024) 5 SCC 815, exemption from the requirement of pre-institution
              mediation is granted.
6.        The application stands disposed of.
I.A. 11792/2026 (Exemption from filing translated copies)
7.        This is an application filed on behalf of the plaintiffs under
Section 151
of CPC seeking exemption from filing translated copies along with the
              captioned suit.
8.        Exemption allowed, subject to just exceptions. However, true
              typed/translated/clear copies of the documents with proper margins be filed
              within four weeks with an advance copy to the defendant.
9.        The application stands disposed of.
I.A. 11790/2026 (U/o XXXIX Rules 1 and 2)
10.       Present application has been filed on behalf of the plaintiff under Order
              XXXIX Rules 1 & 2
of CPC
, 1908 seeking ex-parte ad-interim injunction
              against the defendant.
11.       The plaintiff claims to be a leading food and beverage company in India
              with restaurants across India in various malls and highstreets, operating both
              Casual Dining Restaurants (CDR) and Quick Service Restaurants (QSR). The
              plaintiff at present is stated to be running various well-known restaurants under
              prominent brands including Punjab Grill, You Mee, Zambar, Street Food by
              Punjab Grill, Pino's, Asia 7 etc.
12.       It is stated that the plaintiff company was incorporated in the year 2002
              and during the course of its operations, it opened various well known and
              award-winning restaurants under different brands including PUNJAB GRILL,
              which forms the subject matter of the present suit. It is claimed that the
              trademark PUNJAB GRILL was first adopted in January, 2000 by the
              predecessor of the plaintiff and has been in use since as a brand name for its
              fine dining restaurants. It is claimed that pursuant to the response and
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                   Page 2 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               acceptance as received from the consumers, the plaintiff has now opened
              multiple PUNJAB GRILL restaurants in prominent cities across the country,
              from Delhi NCR to Kochi. After earning several critical accolades &
              nationwide acclaim, PUNJAB GRILL has expanded its reach globally by
              opening outlets in Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Bangkok & Singapore.
13.       The plaintiff at present is claimed to have set up and is managing and
              operating 58 PUNJAB GRILL restaurants pan India, the details of which are
              enumerated in para 15 of the plaint. The plaintiff is the registered proprietor of
              the trademark 'PUNJAB GRILL' and its variants in Class-43. The details of the
              plaintiff's registrations for PUNJAB GRILL and various other marks are
              mentioned below:-
14.       In addition to above, the plaintiff has also registered the trademark
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 3 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               PUNJAB GRILL and other marks containing the same in other foreign
              jurisdictions, the details of which are enumerated in para 18 of the plaint.
15.       It is claimed that the plaintiff has invested considerable time and money
              in developing the manner of serving its food and beverages at the PUNJAB
              GRILL restaurants. Plaintiff also claims that it is very active on social
              networking sites such as Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube and has a
              large number of followers on these websites, which further establish its fame
              and reputation among the general public. The plaintiff's restaurants are also
              listed on third party restaurant search engines like Zomato, Swiggy, Eazy Diner
              etc. The plaintiff also has extensive online present on the domain name
              https://www.lbf.co.in/brand/punjab-grill.
16.       In addition, the plaintiff claims to extensively advertise its trademarks
              including the trademark 'PUNJAB GRILL' and its variants. The details of the
              promotional expenses incurred by the plaintiff is enumerated hereunder:-
17.       Plaintiff claims that due to such extensive advertising and excellence in
              service, the turnover of the plaintiff has been on the rise. The details of the
              plaintiff's sales turnover for the last few years is reproduced hereunder:-
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 4 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
18.       Plaintiff also claims to have been vigilant about protecting the identity
              and distinctiveness of its PUNJAB GRILL brand and has taken continuous
              actions in the past, opposing attempts by many third parties, who have tried to
              use or register any deceptively similar trademarks for their business and
              activities.
19.       It is claimed that by virtue of the above registrations and extensive sales
              turnover and promotional activities as well as significant use and reputation in
              India and internationally, coupled with active enforcement, the plaintiff's
              'PUNJAB GRILL' has acquired immense goodwill and reputation and thus, is
              eligible to be recognized as a well-known trademark in India under
Section
              2(1)(zg)
read with
Section 11(6)
of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The PUNJAB
              GRILL restaurants of the plaintiff are claimed to have become synonymous
              with the plaintiff alone and members of the public and those of the trade are
              aware of the said brand and associate the same with the plaintiff and none else.
20.       It is stated that the defendant is engaged in the business of running a
              restaurant and bar under the name and style ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL/
              ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL & BAR BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE in Delhi. The
              defendant is the proprietor and person in control of the said establishment and
              is actively promoting and advertising the impugned mark both through physical
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 5 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               restaurant operations and through online platforms including social media.
21.       The defendant is using the impugned mark in signage, menu cards,
              promotional materials, online listings, and social media advertisements
              including the defendant's Instagram page operating under the handle,
              https://www.instagram.com/royalpunjabgrill_sf.
22.       Upon conducting further investigations, the plaintiff claims to have
              discovered that the defendant has also applied for registration of the mark
              'ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL & BAR BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE' under
              Application No.6516907 in Class-43 before the Trade Marks Registry on a
              proposed to be used basis. The said application has been filed in respect of
              restaurant and hospitality services identical to those of the plaintiff and is
              presently pending.
23.       Being aggrieved by the above, the plaintiff through its counsel issued a
              Cease and Desist Notice dated 01.10.2025 calling upon the defendant to
              immediately stop using the impugned mark ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL & BAR
              BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE, withdraw the trademark application, and disclose
              accounts of profits earned through such infringing activities. The defendant
              sent a reply dated 06.02.2026 denying infringement and claiming that the
              words "Punjab" and "Grill" are generic.
24.       It is stated that even the manner in which the defendant advertises its
              restaurant i.e. referring to it as 'PUNJAB GRILL', clearly indicates its mala
              fide intent to pass off its restaurant as and for being affiliated and/or connected
              with the 'PUNJAB GRILL' chain of the plaintiff in addition to infringe the
              registered trademark of the plaintiff. Plaintiff submits that the act of the
              defendant is likely to cause confusion and deception in the mind of a customer
              with average intelligence and imperfect recollection on account of the use of
              deceptively similar trademark by the defendant for the same services, same
              market and same target audience.
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 6 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
25.       Predicated thereon, the plaintiff seeks an ex-parte ad-interim injunction
              against the defendant.
26.       After having perused the plaint, and the documents annexed therewith
              and having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the plaintiff, this Court
              is of the considered opinion that an ex-parte ad-interim injunction would be in
              order.
27.       At the outset, it would be relevant to consider the comparison between
              the rival marks:-
28.       A visual comparison of both the marks clearly depict that the registered
              trademark of the plaintiff 'PUNJAB GRILL' is subsumed in the impugned
              trademark 'ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL' and 'ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL &
              BAR BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE'. The usage of the prefix 'ROYAL' to the mark
              'PUNJAB GRILL' in the present context and having regard to the fact that both
              parties are in the same line of trade, would not depict any distinction or
              difference between the two marks. In fact, the marks of the defendant can be
              said to be identical or deceptively identical. Even the device mark in the
              comparative table above also appears to be emphasizing on the mark 'PUNJAB
              GRILL' inasmuch as the words 'BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE' is in the subscript. In
              other words, the mark 'PUNJAB GRILL' is predominantly used. Having
              regard to the number of registrations that the plaintiff has obtained, the high
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 7 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               number of restaurants set up and managed by the plaintiff pan India, its
              extensive popularity and the huge social media presence on platforms like
              Instagram, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube coupled with the huge promotional
              expenses undertaken by it in the last ten years and the tremendous sales
              turnover over the last ten years, prima facie, indicate substantial goodwill and
              reputation enjoyed by the plaintiff over the last many years.
29.       That apart, the defendant has applied for the registration of its marks on
              08.07.2024 in Class-43 on proposed to be used basis. It is relevant to note that
              in response to the Cease and Desist notice dated 01.10.2025, the defendant by
              its reply dated 06.02.2026 asserted that the plaintiff cannot claim exclusive or
              monopolistic rights over common, generic and geographical terms such as
              'PUNJAB' and 'GRILL'. A party which is itself applying for registration of a
              mark containing the words 'PUNJAB GRILL' cannot be permitted to take the
              aforenoted stand as it would amount to approbate and reprobate.
30.       Further, as on the date when the defendant had applied for registration
              i.e. 08.07.2024, the sales revenue of the plaintiff for FY 2023-24 was to the
              extent of Rs.4,12,29,03,680/- and the promotional expenses for the same FY
              was to the extent of Rs.8,55,99,028/-. Clearly, even before the defendant
              stepped into the market, the plaintiff's mark 'PUNJAB GRILL' had garnered
              substantial goodwill and reputation. It is also relevant to note that the plaintiff
              has also obtained registration of its mark 'PUNJAB GRILL' even in other
              jurisdictions like UAE as far back as on 04.11.2019 under Class-29.
31.       The use of the mark 'PUNJAB GRILL' by the defendant on social media
              platform like Instagram also does not appear to be appropriate for the aforesaid
              reasons. The adoption of the mark 'PUNJAB GRILL' by the defendant
              therefore, does not seem to be bona fide. It is likely that a consumer with an
              average intelligence and imperfect recollection would get confused or deceived
              into believing that the goods and services provided by the defendant are those
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 8 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               of the plaintiff or are associated with it. The goods and services provided by the
              parties being common, the trade circles and the general public benefitting from
              such services could also be common. In these circumstances, the likelihood of
              confusion and deception is clearly evident.
32.       In view of the above, the plaintiff has been able to establish a, prima
              facie, strong case in its favour. Having regard to the aforesaid documentary
              evidence, the balance of convenience is tilted in favour of the plaintiff. The
              plaintiff shall suffer irreparable loss and injury which may not be adequately
              compensated in monetary terms in case an ex-parte ad-interim injunction order
              is not passed.
33.       In view of the aforesaid, the defendant, including her principals,
              partners, employees, agents, distributors, franchisees, representatives, heirs,
              successors and assigns are restrained from manufacturing, selling, marketing,
              advertising and/or offering its services and/or in any other manner using and/or
              allowing or permitting third parties to market, advertise and/or use the
              trademark 'ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL', 'ROYAL PUNJAB GRILL & BAR
              BY SOCIAL AFFAIRE' and/or any other trademark or name identical and/or
              similar to the plaintiff's trademark 'PUNJAB GRILL' and its variants, either as
              a trademark or part of a trademark, a trade name or corporate name or as a part
              of a domain name.
34.       Issue notice.
35.       Let a reply to this application be filed by the defendant within four weeks
              from service. Rejoinder, thereto, if any, be filed within two weeks thereafter.
36.       Compliance of
Order XXXIX Rule 3 of CPC
shall be done within ten
              days from date.
CS(COMM) 448/2026
37.       Let the plaint be registered as a suit.
38.       Upon filing of the process fee, issue summons of the suit to the defendant
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                    Page 9 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19
               through all permissible modes.
39.       The summons shall state that the Written Statement shall be filed by the
              defendant within 30 days from the date of the receipt of summons. Alongwith
              the Written Statement, the defendant shall also file Affidavit of
              Admission/Denial of the documents of the plaintiffs, without which the Written
              Statement shall not be taken on record.
40.       Liberty is granted to the plaintiff to file Replication, if any, within 30
              days from the receipt of the Written Statement. Along with the Replication
              filed by the plaintiff, an Affidavit of Admission/Denial of the documents of
              defendant be filed by the plaintiff, without which the Replication shall not be
              taken on record.
41.       In case any party is placing reliance on a document, which is not in their
              power and possession, its details and source shall be mentioned in the list of
              reliance, which shall also be filed with the pleadings.
42.       If any of the parties wish to seek inspection of any documents, the same
              shall be sought and given within the prescribed timelines.
43.       List before the Joint Registrar (Judicial) on 22.07.2026 for completion of
              service and pleadings.
44.       List before the Court on 09.10.2026.
TUSHAR RAO GEDELA, J
              APRIL 28, 2026
              yrj
CS(COMM) 448/2026                                                                                     Page 10 of 10
This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above.
The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 01/05/2026 at 21:28:19

Cancel