Supreme Court: Parents’ Loss Cannot Be Measured With Arithmetical Precision  ||  Supreme Court: Registered Sale Deed Remains Valid Despite Minor Attestation Discrepancies  ||  Calcutta High Court: Section 107 BNSS Property Attachment Cannot be Used as a Recovery Tool  ||  Ker HC: Elected Representatives Must Swear by God or Affirm, Cannot Invoke Specific Deities in Oath  ||  Rajasthan High Court: Ward Delimitation Must Rely on Population, Not Voter Count  ||  SC: Readiness for Agreement Execution Must be Proven From Agreement Date, Not Only After Suit Filing  ||  Supreme Court: Long Gap Without Similar Criminal Conduct May Mitigate Sentence  ||  Supreme Court: Loss of Right Leg Constitutes 100% Functional Disability for a Mason  ||  Del HC Orders Fresh All India Tennis Association Elections by Sept 30, Sets Timeline for Amendments  ||  Bombay High Court Permits 26-Week Pregnancy Termination Due to Fetal Anomalies, Financial Hardship    

Haldiram Bhujiawala and Ors. v. Anand Kumar Deepak Kumar and Ors. - (High Court of Delhi) (19 Oct 2015)

Deciphering Haldiram: Court finds needle in bhujia

MANU/DE/3333/2015

Intellectual Property Rights

In a convoluted and long-standing case involving a devolved Haldiram brand, the Delhi High Court assessed plethoric familial disputes, sprinkled with trade mark claims, to come to the conclusion that the trial court was correct in its determination that Appellants’ use of the brand Haldiram Bhujiawala had caused irreparable harm to the Respondents’ business ‘Haldiram’. The Court dismissed contentions that the trial court had conducted a ‘mini-trial’ in the grant of temporary injunction at an interim stage of legal proceedings.

Relevant : Anand Prasad Agarwalla v. Tarkeshwar Prasad and Ors.MANU/SC/0350/2001 Wander Limited and Anr. v. Antox India Pvt. Limited MANU/SC/0595/1990 ALKEM Laboratories Limited v. Mega International (Private) Limited MANU/DE/0957/2007

Tags : HALDIRAM   INTERIM INJUNCTION   MINI TRIAL  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved