The Supreme Court temporarily allowed a Pune-based restaurant to continue using the ‘Burger King’ name. The dispute involves US-based Burger King Corporation, which entered India in 2014. However, the Pune eatery has been operating under the same name since 2008. The case raises legal questions about trademark rights and prior usage in India.
New Delhi: The Supreme Court temporarily stayed a recent order from the Bombay High Court that had prohibited a Pune-based restaurant from using the name “Burger King.”
This stay allows the Pune eatery to continue operating under its name until the matter is resolved by the High Court.
A Bench comprising Justices BV Nagarathna and Satish Chandra Sharma stated,
“The impugned order shall remain stayed. However, the Bombay High Court can continue to hear the appeal.”
The Bombay High Court previously stayed a Pune court’s ruling that dismissed a trademark infringement lawsuit filed by the US fast-food giant Burger King Corporation against the local burger joint.
The dispute centers on Burger King Corporation, which entered the Indian market in 2014, and the Pune-based restaurant that has been using the “Burger King” name since 2008. The US company argued that the local eatery’s use of the name was damaging its brand reputation and sought a permanent injunction to prevent it from using the trademark.
In July 2024, a Pune court ruled in favor of the local restaurant, citing its prior use of the name. The court noted that the Pune establishment had been operating since the early 1990s, while Burger King Corporation registered its trademark for restaurant services in India only in 2006. The court declared the Pune restaurant a “prior and honest user” of the name, dismissing the US company’s lawsuit.
Burger King then appealed this decision in the Bombay High Court, asserting that it had registered the trademark in India as early as 1979, despite entering the market later. The local restaurant’s legal team argued that it had been using the name since 1992, long before the US chain launched in India.
Also Read: Wow Momo Cannot Claim Monopoly Over The Word ‘Wow’: Delhi High Court
The owner of the Pune eatery was represented by Senior Advocates Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi and K Parameshwar, along with Advocates Abhijit Sarwate and Anand Dilip Landge.
They contended that the Pune joint had been using the mark well before the US corporation’s entry into India and accused Burger King of “squatting” on their trademark, noting that the US company had only applied for registration for paper products, not restaurant services.
They also argued that granting an interim stay against a trial court’s decree could have significant consequences, as it might take a long time for the appeal to be resolved.
Advocate Raunaq Kamath, representing the US corporation, argued that the appeal was progressing swiftly in the Bombay High Court and claimed that there was no justification for staying the High Court’s order. He asserted that operating a restaurant under the Burger King name could confuse consumers.
However, the Court granted relief to the Indian restaurant, pointing out that it had only two locations in Pune while Burger King is a global corporation with numerous outlets.
The Court remarked that an interim stay against a trial court’s decree could adversely affect the party subject to the stay, leading to the decision to stay the High Court’s order.
Burger King US was represented by Raunaq Kamath, Aditya Verma, Mukul Kochar, and Aakriti Bansal from Ira Law.
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
