Haldiram India v. Berachah Sales Corp: A Landmark in Well-Known Trademark Protection

Introduction

The Delhi High Court’s decision in Haldiram India Pvt. Ltd. v. Berachah Sales Corp. & Ors. stands as a defining moment in Indian trademark protection jurisprudence. The Court not only protected a leading Indian brand from infringement but also formally recognized HALDIRAM as a “well-known trademark” under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trademarks Act, 1999. This judgment reinforces the reach of well-known marks beyond registration classes, geographic limitations, and territorial use, setting a valuable precedent for enforcement of brand reputation and consumer association in India. 

Factual Background

About the Plaintiff 

Haldiram India Pvt. Ltd., a household name in India, traces its roots back to 1941 in Bikaner. Over the decades, the company has expanded its operations into manufacturing, distributing, and operating food and beverage outlets. It has registered its primary logos, including a stylized “V-shaped” and “oval” mark, in various classes, primarily under Classes 29, 30, and 43, encompassing food products and restaurant services.  

The Infringement 

In 2018, the defendants established “Haldiram Restro Pvt. Ltd.” in Ambala City and subsequently applied to register the marks HALDIRAM BHUJIAWALA, HALDIRAM RESTRO, and similar variants under Class 43. They also operated restaurants under the name Haldiram, using logos and trade dress nearly identical to the plaintiff’s. 

The defendants’ domain names, restaurant interiors, packaging, and branding bore striking resemblance to those of Haldiram India, creating significant risk of confusion and deception among consumers. 

This blog is a part of our The Ultimate Guide to Intellectual Property Law – ATB Legal blogpost.

Legal Framework Invoked

Haldiram initiated proceedings before the Delhi High Court invoking the following provisions: 

• • Section 29 – Trademark Infringement 

• • Section 16 – Prohibition on use of registered company names similar to registered trademarks 

• • Section 2(1)(zg) – Definition and recognition of “well-known trademarks” 

• • Section 11(6) – Factors to determine whether a mark is well-known 

Additionally, the plaintiff sought relief by way of a permanent injunction, damages, and costs, and requested a declaration recognizing HALDIRAM as a well-known trademark in India. 

Court’s Analysis and Findings

Justice Prathiba M. Singh, presiding over the matter, delivered a comprehensive judgment addressing the following key issues: 

Application of the Triple Identity Test 

The Court adopted the well-established triple identity test to ascertain infringement. This test evaluates whether there is identity between: 

• • • The marks used by the plaintiff and the defendant; 

• • • The goods/services in which the mark is used; 

• • • The trade channels or market positioning. 

The Court found full identity in all three prongs: 

• • • Marks: The defendants used the name HALDIRAM and variations thereof, which were visually and phonetically identical. 

• • • Goods/Services: Both parties operated in the food and restaurant business, offering similar products and services. 

• • • Trade Channels: Identical modes of marketing and consumer targeting were used, including dine-in outlets and takeaways with matching signage and interiors. 

The Court concluded that the defendants’ use was calculated to ride upon the reputation of the plaintiff’s mark. 

Determination of “Well-Known Trademark” Status under Section 11(6) 

Justice Singh meticulously applied the statutory criteria under Section 11(6), which include: 

• • • Recognition by relevant public; 

• • • Duration, extent and geographical use; 

• • • Duration and extent of promotion and advertisement; 

• • • Enforcement and successful assertion of rights; 

• • • Extent of recognition in India and abroad. 

The Court observed: 

• • • Haldiram’s legacy extended over eight decades with nationwide and international presence. 

• • • The brand’s reputation extended even to regions such as West Bengal, where the plaintiff had no business operations—demonstrating the strength of its spill-over reputation. 

• • • There was evidence of substantial advertising, exports, brand enforcement, and domain ownership, all indicating strong consumer association with the mark HALDIRAM. 

• • • The company had taken proactive steps to oppose third-party registrations and had a long history of trademark litigation, strengthening its claim to well-known status. 

In light of these findings, the Court formally declared HALDIRAM to be a well-known trademark under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trademarks Act. 

Grant of Permanent Injunction 

A broad permanent injunction was granted, prohibiting the defendants and their affiliates from: 

• • • Using the marks HALDIRAM, HALDIRAM BHUJIAWALA, or any deceptively similar variant. 

• • • Operating restaurants or food outlets using similar signage. 

The Court further directed authorities such as the Ministry of Corporate Affairs and domain registrars to cancel or prevent registration of deceptively similar company names or domains. 

Legal and Commercial Implications

Strengthening the ‘Well-Known’ Trademark Doctrine

This decision affirms that trademarks with high consumer recall and market presence, even in unregistered categories or territories, can enjoy full protection. The Court’s interpretation of Sections 11(6) and 2(1)(zg) advances jurisprudence in line with international IP norms and WIPO standards. 

Consumer Perception as Legal Evidence

The Court recognized consumer awareness and reputation spill-over as sufficient to trigger legal protection, regardless of actual commercial operations in certain territories. This underscores the importance of brand perception in infringement claims. 

Utility of the Triple Identity Test

The judgment showcases how the triple identity test offers an effective analytical tool for establishing infringement in complex cases involving identical or overlapping businesses. 

Deterrence Through Exemplary Damages

The high damages imposed by the Court reflect a judicial trend towards commercial deterrence, particularly when infringement is wilful.  

Expanding Territorial Scope of Protection

By recognizing HALDIRAM as a well-known mark despite operational gaps in certain regions, the Court embraced a dynamic and borderless approach to trademark enforcement—increasingly necessary in today’s interconnected markets.  

Strategic Takeaways for Stakeholders

Defining the Reach of Well-Known Trademarks in Indian Jurisprudence

The Haldiram v. Berachah ruling represents a milestone in the Indian IP landscape. It solidifies the evolving jurisprudence around well-known trademarks, emphasizing the relevance of brand recognition, consumer association, and market penetration, even beyond formal registration boundaries. 

The decision also acts as a strong deterrent against brand hijacking and reinforces judicial willingness to protect India’s most iconic trademarks. For legal practitioners, brand owners, and businesses alike, the case provides valuable precedent for protecting commercial identity in an increasingly competitive and deceptive market environment.