Piruz Khambatta & Anr. Vs Franchise India Brands Limited & Anr. (Delhi High Court)
Delhi High Court has issued an ex parte ad interim injunction against Franchise India Brands Limited and Ichakdana Food Services LLP, restraining them from further using the ‘Rasna’ and ‘Rasna Buzz’ trademarks. The order, delivered by the court, follows a lawsuit filed by Piruz Khambatta and Rasna Private Limited, alleging trademark infringement after the expiry of a work order and master license agreement.
The plaintiffs, prominent in the food and beverage industry since the early 1990s, have marketed products under the ‘RASNA’ trademark since 1972. They assert that ‘RASNA’ is a coined and invented word, registered across multiple classes and forming a dominant feature of their trade name and house-mark. They also claim copyright ownership over their artistic works related to the brand.
Defendant No. 1, Franchise India Brands Limited, described as a franchise solution provider, and Defendant No. 2, Ichakdana Food Services LLP, an F&B franchise management company, had entered into a Work Order dated October 30, 2018, and a subsequent Master License Agreement with the plaintiffs. This arrangement aimed to expand the ‘Rasna Buzz’ brand, with a commitment to open 100 outlets within four years. During the agreement’s term, over 25 authorized ‘Rasna Buzz’ outlets were established.
However, the plaintiffs contended that discrepancies emerged regarding financial obligations. They consistently raised concerns about delayed and incomplete payment of franchise fees and royalties, alongside a lack of transparency in revenue reporting from the defendants. Consequently, the Work Order was not renewed.
A meeting held on September 21, 2024, saw the defendants acknowledge that key financial data, including franchise fees and royalty payments since March 2020, had not been provided. They committed to submitting comprehensive reconciliation reports by October 15, 2024, along with an outstanding payment of ₹12,00,000.
Despite these commitments, the plaintiffs discovered on January 23, 2025, through various online news articles, that the defendants had continued to unlawfully expand the ‘Rasna Buzz’ franchise. This prompted a cease and desist letter from the plaintiffs on February 24, 2025, demanding an immediate halt to all ‘Rasna Buzz’ operations and unauthorized use of the ‘Rasna’ branding. The defendants neither responded nor complied. Further evidence presented to the court included promotional content posted by the defendants on their Instagram page as recently as March 31, 2025, displaying the ‘Rasna Buzz’ mark, which the plaintiffs cited as clear intent to continue infringing activities.
The court, after hearing arguments and reviewing documents, observed that the defendants, despite being licensees, continued to solicit clients and utilize the plaintiffs’ marks even after the expiry of the work order, without remitting agreed-upon fees. This conduct was deemed to show “clear mala fides” on their part. The court further noted the potential for “huge element of confusion and deception amongst the members of the trade and also of the general public” given the edible nature of the items associated with the trademarks.
The court concluded that the balance of convenience and probabilities favored the plaintiffs, establishing a prima facie case for an ex parte ad interim injunction. The continued unauthorized use of the trademarks was deemed likely to cause irreparable harm, loss, and injury to the plaintiffs’ goodwill.
Citing the Supreme Court’s judgment in Yamini Manohar v. T.K.D. Krithi (2024 (5) SCC 815), which was followed by the Delhi High Court’s Division Bench in Chandra Kishore Chaurasia v. R. A. Perfumery Works Private Limited (2022:DHC:4454-DB), the court also exempted the plaintiffs from pre-litigation mediation, as they were seeking an ex parte ad interim injunction.
As a result, the court restrained the defendants, their directors, partners, principal officers, servants, agents, franchisees, affiliates, sub-franchisees, operator licensees, and all others acting on their behalf, from using the trademarks ‘Rasna’, ‘Rasna Buzz’, or any deceptively similar mark. This includes operating or franchising outlets, advertising, marketing, selling, or offering goods or services under these marks, or misrepresenting any association with the plaintiffs, thereby preventing further infringement of the registered trademarks or artistic works. The next hearing for the matter is scheduled for September 4, 2025.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF DELHI HIGH COURT
