Supreme Court Upholds Conviction as Husband Failed to Explain Wife’s Death in Matrimonial Home  ||  Supreme Court: Crime Scene Re-Enactment Does Not Always Violate Right Against Self-Incrimination  ||  Supreme Court: Cognizance Taken Without Hearing Accused under BNSS Section 223 is Void Ab Initio  ||  Supreme Court Upholds Will in Sister’s Favour, Says Excluding Natural Heirs is Not Suspicious  ||  Delhi HC: Absence of Public Witnesses and Videography in NDPS Recovery Relevant for Bail Decisions  ||  Raj HC Initiates Suo Motu Cognizance Over Severe Water Crisis in Jodhpur, Issues Interim Directions  ||  Del HC: Courts Cannot Direct, Monitor Inquiry Into Police Delay in Investigation After Bail Decision  ||  Supreme Court: After the BNSS, a Pre-Cognizance Hearing is Mandatory in PMLA Cases  ||  SC: Landowners Cannot be Forced to Waive Statutory Compensation to Claim Other Benefits  ||  Supreme Court: Banks are Lenient With Big Borrowers But Strict With Ordinary Loan Applicants    

Burger King Corporation v. Burger Place - (High Court of Delhi) (07 Sep 2015)

Commercial matters to not be kept lingering in no-contest

MANU/DE/3849/2015

Civil

The Delhi High Court allowed a trade mark suit in favour of international food chain, ‘Burger King’ despite the Defendant’s non-cooperation. Arising from the Defendant’s use of the name ‘Burger Place’ was employed in a mark that resembled closely Burger King’s logo. Whereas a verbal agreement was reached between the parties prior to institution of the suit, the Defendant backtracked on his promises to desist from using the allegedly similar logo. The Court noted that the case was unchallenged and Defendant had refused service of summons. Reiterating Rule 10 of Order VIII CPC, for non-filing of written statement, the commercial nature of the suit and the Defendant’s conduct, the suit was decreed in favour of Burger King Corporation.

Relevant : Kailash vs. Nankhu & Ors. MANU/SC/0264/2005 Salem Advocate Bar Association, Tamil Nadu vs. Union of India MANU/SC/0450/2005 Rule 10 Order VIII Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 Act

Tags : TRADE MARK   SUMMONS   WRITTEN STATEMENT   EX PARTE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved