Arctic
Invent
Case Registry
Dashboard
Case Explorer
Back to Explorer
Update Case Entry
Manually curate individual case documents inside the PostgreSQL engine.
Case Lawsuit Title
*
Case / Trial ID Number
Jurisdiction Code
*
us
in
upc
eu
Category
*
Patent
Trademark
Copyright
Design
Filing Date
Decision Verdict Date
Court / Tribunal
Bench / Panel Judges
Petitioner / Claimant (Plaintiff)
Delhi Zaika Through Partners Mr Aamir Siddiqui
Respondent / Defendant
Zidz Hospitality LLP & Ors.
Dispute Summary
The plaintiff, Delhi Zaika, filed a suit against Zidz Hospitality LLP for trademark infringement and passing off. The court granted ad-interim relief in favor of the plaintiff, restraining the defendants from using the trademark 'DELHI ZAIKA'. The defendants were found to have breached the earlier order and were given an opportunity to file a reply, which they failed to do. The court allowed the interim application and granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (a), (b), (c) and (d).
Outcome / Ruling
plaintiff_favorable
Verdict Document PDF URL
Full text judgment
[Cites 0 , Cited by 0 ] Bombay High Court Delhi Zaika Through Partners Mr Aamir ... vs Zidz Hospitality Llp on 14 July, 2026 Author: Madhav J. Jamdar Bench: Madhav J. Jamdar 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.39269 OF 2025 Digitally signed by IN ARJUN ARJUN VITTHAL VITTHAL KUDHEKAR COMMERCIAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY KUDHEKAR Date: 2026.07.18 RIGHTS SUIT (LODGING) NO.31885 OF 2025 15:37:15 +0530 M/s. Delhi Zaika ...Applicant Through Partner Mr. Aamir Siddiqui In the matter between: M/s. Delhi Zaika ...Plaintiff Through Partner Mr. Aamir Siddiqui Versus Zidz Hospitality LLP & Ors. ...Defendants WITH INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.22448 OF 2026 IN COMMERCIAL INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SUIT (LODGING) NO.31885 OF 2025 M/s. Delhi Zaika ...Applicant Through Partner Mr. Aamir Siddiqui In the matter between: M/s. Delhi Zaika ...Plaintiff Through Partner Mr. Aamir Siddiqui Versus Zidz Hospitality LLP & Ors. ...Defendants ------------ Mr. Amogh Singh a/w Rahul Arora i/b D. P. Singh, for the Applicant/Plaintiff. ------------ Arjun 1 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar, J. Date: July 14, 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Amogh Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant/Plaintiff. 2. Mr. Amogh Singh, learned Counsel, submits that a learned Single Judge by Order dated 11th March 2026 has granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). However, the said Order has been breached and, therefore, Interim Application (Lodging) No.22448 of 2026 has been filed, inter alia, seeking appointment of the Court Receiver and certain other reliefs. He submits that although the learned Advocate has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the Defendants, none has appeared for the Defendants in spite of giving opportunity by this Court. 3. Perusal of the record shows that a learned Single Judge by detailed Order dated 11th March 2026 passed in Interim Application (Lodging) No.39269 of 2025 has granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). The said Order dated 11th March 2026 reads as under: "1. This is an action for infringement of trade mark, copyright and passing-off. 2. At the outset, Mr. Singh would seek to replace Exhibit-I of the plaint which is an incorrect statement annexed to the plaint. Liberty granted to annex the correct statement of income and expenditure. Amendment to be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with. Arjun 2 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc 3. Mr. Singh, learned counsel appearing for Plaintiff would submit that Defendants were attempted to be served, however, Defendant No. 2 has refused service and that Affidavit of service will be filed in the course of day. 4. He submits that the Plaintiff coined the name "DELHI ZAIKA-the Pure Taste of Delhi" for running the restaurant business in or around the year 2010 and filed for registration of the mark on 13th January, 2011 in class 43 which was granted registration on 29th February, 2016. He submits that the Plaintiff's trade mark "DELHI ZAIKA" has earned substantial reputation and goodwill and currently the Plaintiff is running five restaurants using the registered trade mark. He submits that copyright in the original artwork was designed at the instance of the Plaintiff and the ownership subsists in the favor of Plaintiff. He would submit that the Plaintiff has been bestowed with several Awards and points out to extensive promotional activities carried out by the Plaintiff in respect of its registered trade mark. 5. He submits that Defendant No. 2 in the year 2010 had entered into verbal partnership with Plaintiff for running restaurant services under the Plaintiff's registered trade mark at Kurla. He submits that in or about the year 2022, as the Defendant's established a new kitchen at Kurla for carrying out large scale catering operations by reason of which there was dispute and the Defendant's started carrying out restaurant activities from different kitchen. He submits that as the verbal agreement was that there should be common kitchen from which the food was supplied to various hotels and as the Defendants have established separate kitchen and separate business, the Defendants should cease using the Plaintiff's registered trade mark. He submits that despite thereof, the Defendants are continuing the use of the registered trademark and points out to photographs which are annexed to the plaint. He would submit that the Defendant's instagram page uses the Plaintiff's registered trade mark and merely adds the word "Kurla" which is immaterial. He would further point out to menu card which are at page nos. 182 and 183 to demonstrate the use of the registered mark by the Defendants. Arjun 3 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc 6. I have considered the submissions and perused the record. 7. The Defendants have refused to accept service despite notice having been issued by this Court. The Plaintiff's proprietary right in the registered trade mark of "DELHI ZAIKA" is prima facie demonstrated from the registration certificate which has been placed on record. The registration has been secured by the Plaintiff in the year 2011. Considering the proprietary right of the Plaintiff in the registered trademark, without the consent of the Plaintiff, the Defendants are prima facie not entitled to use the registered trade mark. The material on record prima facie demonstrates that there was verbal arrangement between the parties under which restaurant business was being carried out from a common kitchen. It is specifically pleaded that Defendant No. 2 is the biological brother of Plaintiff and Defendant No. 2 was permitted under the mutual arrangement and understanding to use the trade mark subject to condition that there would be sharing of profits. In the year 2023, the Defendants have prima facie established a new kitchen at Kurla and that being so, permissive user by Plaintiff ceased and the Defendants were therefore, prima facie not entitled to use the registered trade mark. The photographs which are placed on record would prima facie demonstrate the use of the registered trade mark by the Defendants. 8. There are sufficient disclosures as far as the Defendants are concerned. The sales turnover and promotional material which have been placed on record prima facie demonstrates the enormous reputation and goodwill which has been earned by the Plaintiff. Prima facie the use of identical mark by the Defendants is likely to result into confusion amongst the public and misled the public that the Defendant's business is that of the Plaintiff. There is no probable defense available to the Defendants particularly, considering the use of the Plaintiff's registered trade mark. 9. In light of the above, prima facie case has been made out for grant of ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a). 10. Stand over to 6th April, 2026. Arjun 4 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc 11. Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till next date." 4. The ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) of Interim Application (L) No.39269 of 2025, is as under: "a) That pending hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, the Defendants themselves through their proprietor, partners, directors, exporters and otherwise be restrained by an order of temporary bearing injunction of this Hon'ble Court from infringing the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark registration number 2084815;" 5. By taking contention that the Defendants have violated the said Order dated 11th March 2026 passed by the learned Single Judge, Interim Application (Lodging) No.22448 of 2026 has been filed seeking several prayers. Mr. Amogh Singh, learned Counsel for the Plaintiff, states that, at this stage, the Plaintiff is pressing for ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clauses (b), (c) and (d), which read as under: "b) That pending hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, this Hon'ble Court be pleased to appoint a Court Receiver, High Court, Bombay, under Order XL Rule 1 and also under Order XXXIX Rule 7 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, as receiver of the goods of the Defendants showing the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark bearing registration number 2084815; c) That pending hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, the Defendants themselves through their proprietor, partners, directors, exporters and otherwise be restrained by an order of temporary injunction of this Hon'ble Court from operating on Zomato, Swiggy or any other platforms under Arjun 5 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark bearing registration number 2084815; d) That pending hearing and final disposal of the present Suit, the Defendants themselves through their proprietor, partners, directors, exporters and otherwise be restrained by an order of temporary injunction of this Hon'ble Court from offering food services at any restaurant / cloud kitchen / online platforms and / or offering catering services under the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark bearing registration number 2084815;" 6. The relevant Paragraphs of Interim Application (L) No.22448 of 2026, are as follows: "26. The Applicant further states that, despite the said Injunctive Order dated 11th March 2026 passed by this Hon'ble Court thereby restraining the Defendants from infringing the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark and passing- off, the Defendants, despite knowledge of the said Interim Order, have failed or rather willfully refused to comply with the said Order dated 11th March 2026. A copy of the Registered A.D. Postal Receipt addressed by the Applicant / Plaintiff to the Defendants is annexed hereto and marked as "Exhibit-B". 27. The Defendants, till date, operate under the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark to carry out large scale restaurant and catering business, which is contemptuous and deprecating for being in willful breach of the said Ad- interim Order. The copies of the Geo-tagged Satellite photographs indicating the Defendants' use of the Plaintiff's registered Trade Mark "Delhi Zaika - the Pure Taste of Delhi" are annexed hereto and marked as "Exhibit- C". 28. The Applicant, on personal knowledge and reliable information, states that the Defendants have been offering food services at the restaurant at Kurla branch, and have also been offering catering services at various events all over Mumbai under the Plaintiff's Trade Mark 'Delhi Zaika', Arjun 6 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc which constitutes continuous infringement Applicant's registered Trade Mark. 29. The Applicant states that the Applicant addressed communication dated 23rd March 2026 to the Senior Inspector of Police, Kurla Police Station, informing them about the blatant breach of the Ad-Interim Order dated 11 th March 2026 by the Defendants, thereby requesting the police authorities to take action against the Defendants. The Applicant further states that the Applicant has addressed various such communications to Asst. Municipal Commissioner (L-Ward, Kurla West), Chief Fire Officer, Kurla, and Inspector of Shops & Establishment, Kurla West, thereby informing the said Authorities about the willful breach of the Orders passed by this Hon'ble Court and to take strict action against the Defendants. The copies of the said letters / communications addressed to the Authorities are annexed hereto and marked as "Exhibit-D". 30. The Applicant, on personal knowledge and reliable information, states that the Defendants have been offering food services on Zomato & Swiggy food-delivery platforms under the name "Delhi Zaika Nx" which clearly indicates that the Defendants have knowledge of the afore- mentioned Ad-interim Order dated 11th March 2026 and have unsuccessfully attempted to disguise their business by changing the name from "Delhi Zaika" to "Delhi Zaika Nx". 7. Although Mr. Fahad Shaikh, learned Advocate has filed Vakalatnama, none has appeared for the Defendants on 10th July 2026. Therefore, this Court passed the following Order on 10th July 2026: "1) Although, Mr. Fahad Ahmed Shaikh, learned counsel has filed Vakalatnama on behalf of the Defendants, none appears for the Defendants. 2) To give one more opportunity to the Defendants, stand over to 14th July, 2026 at 3:00 p.m. 3) It is made clear that if inspite of this opportunity, if Arjun 7 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc none appears for the Defendants, then the Court will proceed to hear Interim Application (L.) No. 22448 of 2026 and Interim Application (L.) No. 39269 of 2026 on the next date." 8. Despite granting this opportunity, even today also none appears for the Defendants. 9. Inspite of filing Vakalatnama by the Advocate of the Defendants, none has appeared for the Defendants, even the reply is also not filed to both the Interim Applications. A learned Single Judge has already granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause (a) of Interim Application (L) No.39269 of 2025. Thus, the contentions raised in said Interim Application have remained uncontroverted. 10. Accordingly, following Order is passed: INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.39269 OF 2025 This Interim Application is allowed in terms of prayer clause (a). INTERIM APPLICATION (L) NO.22448 OF 2026 i. Ad-interim relief is granted in terms of prayer clauses (b), (c) and (d). ii. The Defendants are at liberty to file affidavit-in-reply in Interim Application (L) No.22448 of 2026 within a period of 8 weeks from today. Rejoinder, if any, to be filed 4 weeks thereafter. Arjun 8 06-IA(L)-39269-2025.doc iii. Stand over to 3rd November 2026. [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.] Arjun 9
Cancel
Update Case