The Kerala High Court recently upheld the temporary injunction imposed on Greenmount Spices, restricting it from using the ‘Brahmins’ or ‘Brahmins Sambar Powder’ trademarks until a trademark infringement suit filed by Wipro Enterprises is decided. [Greenmount Spices Private Limited v. Wipro Enterprises Private Limited]
Justice CS Dias opined that Wipro had established a prima facie case to support its claim of prior commercial use of the trademarks in question.
"I am satisfied that the respondent has established a prima facie case, supported by materials indicating prior commercial use of the ‘Brahmins’ trade mark. The balance of convenience is also in favour of the respondent. If the impugned use is ultimately found to infringe the respondent’s [Wipro] rights, its continued use may erode the distinctiveness of the trade mark and cause injury not readily compensable in damages. These conclusions are tentative and shall not prejudice the final adjudication of the suit," the Court said in its judgment.
In 2024, Wipro instituted a suit before a district court to restrain Greenmount from manufacturing, advertising, selling or exporting food products, including sambar powder, and from using Wipro's trademarks, or any identical or deceptively similar marks, including ‘Brahmins’ or ‘Brahmins Sambar Powder’, on packaging, websites or as a trade name or domain name.
Along with the suit, Wipro filed an application for a temporary injunction against Greenmount.
The district court allowed Wipro's application and temporarily injuncted Greenmount from using ‘Brahmins’ or ‘Brahmins Sambar Powder’ trademarks.
Greenmount subsequently moved the High Court challenging the district court's temporary injunction.
They claimed that their trademark is ‘Greenmount’, whereas ‘Brahmin Sambar Powder’ is used only descriptively to identify the product, not as a trademark. They argued that the word ‘Brahmin’ denotes a traditional Hindu community and and sambar is an integral part of their cuisine. This makes the expression ‘Brahmin Sambar Powder’ a generic and descriptive one that is protected by Section 30(2)(a) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Wipro opposed Greenmount's appeal pointing out that it acquired the Brahmins group business together with its trade mark and goodwill and is now the owner of the trade mark ‘Brahmins’. Wipro said it holds 29 registrations for the word ‘Brahmins’, which is a dominant feature in respect of food products. They also submitted that Wipro's predecessor launched ‘Brahmins Sambar Powder’ in 1989 using a distinctive recipe and is one of their leading products.
Wipro contended that due to continuous use and promotion, the trade mark and name ‘Brahmins’ have acquired distinctiveness and is a well-known household brand. They also submitted that they discovered Greenmount's use of the term following consumer complaints.
The High Court noted that the legal provision used by Greenmount to make its case, Section 30(2)(a), does not confer an unrestricted licence to use a registered expression merely because the user characterises it as descriptive.
"Its application turns on whether, viewed in its context, the expression is genuinely used to indicate the kind or another characteristic of the goods" the Court explained.
As such, the matter would have to be considered in detail by the district court hearing the suit, the Court said.
However, the Court noted that the documents submitted by Wipro indicated that Brahmins food products was launched in 1987 and that Wipro had filed an application to register themselves as the subsequent purchaser of the Brahmins trademark.
Opining that Wipro has made out a prima facie case for itself, the Court deemed it appropriate to dismiss Greenmount's appeal and uphold the temporary injunction granted in favour of Wipro.
Greenmount Spices was represetned by advocates Vizzy George Kokkat, V Bovan Cherian Varkey, K Hari Sankar, Ankala Farhath VS and Likhitha Manoj.
Wipro Enterprises was represented by advocates Benoy K Kadavan, Laya George and Mariam J Manavalan.
[Read Judgment]