Trademark Dispute Over ‘MALABAR’ in Biryani Rice: Supreme Court Verdict

The legal battle over the trademark ‘MALABAR’ in the sale of Biryani Rice has been a contentious issue between Parakh Vanijya Private Limited and Baroma Agro Product. The case, which reached the Supreme Court of India, revolves around whether the appellant, Parakh Vanijya, has exclusive rights to the word ‘MALABAR’ for marketing Biryani Rice.

Background of the Case

Parakh Vanijya Private Limited, the appellant, has been using the trademark ‘MALABAR’ for selling Biryani Rice since 2001. The appellant filed a suit in 2012 against Baroma Agro Product, alleging infringement and passing off their registered trademark. An interim injunction was initially granted in favor of the appellant, preventing the respondents from using ‘MALABAR’ in their branding. However, as the case progressed, the High Court modified this injunction, allowing Baroma Agro Product to use ‘MALABAR’ in conjunction with ‘BAROMA’ under specific conditions.

Arguments Presented

Petitioner’s Arguments:

The petitioner argued that they had been using ‘MALABAR’ exclusively for selling Biryani Rice since 2001 and had gained substantial goodwill and reputation in the market. They contended that Baroma Agro Product’s use of the same name could mislead consumers, causing economic harm.

Respondent’s Arguments:

The respondents contended that the word ‘MALABAR’ is a geographical term and cannot be exclusively owned by any one entity. They also provided evidence showing that multiple businesses had already registered trademarks containing ‘MALABAR’ for different food products. They argued that they were not attempting to infringe on the appellant’s goodwill but were merely using a commonly known term.

Supreme Court Judgment

Justice R. Banumathi, delivering the judgment, noted that the appellant’s trademark registration contained a disclaimer explicitly stating that the registration did not grant exclusive rights over the use of the word ‘MALABAR.’ The court observed:

“Since there is a disclaimer to the exclusive use of the word ‘MALABAR’, the appellant has no right over its exclusive use.”

Furthermore, the court compared the label marks of both parties and found that the visual representation of the respondent’s brand was significantly different from that of the appellant’s. The court ruled:

“By comparison of the two label marks, in our view, both appear to be substantially different. There appears to be no similarity between both the labels, more so, deceptive similarity.”

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, allowing Baroma Agro Product to use ‘MALABAR’ in conjunction with ‘BAROMA’ under specified conditions. The appellant’s appeal was dismissed, with the court stating:

“In the result, the appeal is dismissed. All the contentious issues raised by the parties are left open to be resolved in the suit.”

This judgment highlights the importance of disclaimers in trademark registrations and reinforces the principle that generic or geographical names cannot be monopolized by a single entity.

Petitioner Name: Parakh Vanijya Private Limited.
Respondent Name: Baroma Agro Product and Others.
Judgment By: Justice R. Banumathi, Justice Ranjan Gogoi.
Place Of Incident: Calcutta.
Judgment Date: 12-07-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Parakh Vanijya Priva vs Baroma Agro Product Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 12-07-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Contract Disputes
See all petitions in Consumer Rights
See all petitions in Damages and Compensation
See all petitions in Judgment by R. Banumathi
See all petitions in Judgment by Ranjan Gogoi
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Civil Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Civil Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Civil Cases Category