Vegan Hospitality Pvt. Ltd. adopted the brand name PAAKASHALA<\/strong> in 2013 for its food and catering services. It assigned the mark to Sri Anantheshwara Foods Pvt. Ltd<\/strong>. in 2018. Since then, the appellant has run a restaurant chain under the registered trademark PAAKASHALA<\/strong>.<\/p>\n In early 2025, the respondent planned to open a restaurant under the name Dosa Corner Paakashale<\/strong><\/em> in Mysuru. Before the launch, the appellant issued cease-and-desist notices, but the respondent went ahead. A suit was filed seeking a permanent injunction. The trial court initially granted an ad-interim order but later refused a temporary injunction, calling the mark generic.<\/p>\n \u2022 The appellant owns a valid registration for the mark PAAKASHALA<\/strong>. \u2022 Paakashala<\/strong> is a generic Kannada word meaning kitchen<\/em><\/strong> or cooking place<\/em><\/strong>. The Court began by reaffirming a settled principle: a registered trademark is presumed valid until proven otherwise. At the interim stage, courts are not to decide conclusively whether a mark is generic.<\/p>\n It held that the trial court failed to apply the correct standard. As per the Court, a temporary injunction is not about deciding the case finally. It is about preserving rights until trial. It stated that Courts must only examine if the plaintiff has shown:<\/p>\n According to the Court, the appellant met all three.<\/p>\n The Court went on to state that the trial court had treated the term Paakashala<\/strong> as generic, which was not appropriate in an injunction application. The Court noted:<\/p>\n \u201cThe Trial Court\u2026 unnecessarily took pains and dealt with a temporary injunction application as if it were deciding a main issue.\u201d (\u00b611) It also clarified that rectification proceedings before the Trademark Registry do not bar the court from granting interim relief. It further stated that a party cannot avoid liability for infringement simply by filing a rectification application as rights under registration continue until cancelled.<\/p>\n Based on its analysis, the Court concluded that the respondent\u2019s use of the mark, even with a prefix, amounted to prima facie infringement and could mislead consumers.<\/p>\n The High Court set aside the trial court\u2019s 03.05.2025 order and granted a temporary injunction. The respondent was restrained from using the word PAAKASHALA<\/strong> or any similar variant, with or without a prefix or suffix, until final disposal of the suit.<\/p>\n On prima facie case:<\/p>\n \u201cThe plaintiff has made out a prima facie case for the grant of a temporary injunction.\u201d (\u00b612) On pendency of rectification:<\/p>\n \u201cThe pendency of the rectification application has no significance while considering the temporary injunction application.\u201d (\u00b611) On incorrect standard applied by trial court:<\/p>\n \u201cThe Trial Court\u2026 unnecessarily took pains and dealt with a temporary injunction application as if it were deciding a main issue.\u201d (\u00b611)<\/p>\n This case note has been prepared based on the author\u2019s understanding, views, and conclusions. Opinions of others may differ. A proprietary AI application has been used to create the blog post , and went through basic review before publication.<\/p>\nIssues for the Court<\/h5>\n
\n
\n
\n
Key Arguments<\/h5>\n
Appellant:<\/h6>\n
\n\u2022 Under Section 28(1)<\/span>, registration gives the exclusive right to use the mark for the registered services.
\n\u2022 The respondent\u2019s use of a similar mark creates confusion and infringes that exclusive right.
\n\u2022 The trial court erred by treating the interim application as a final determination on genericness.
\n\u2022 The rectification petition is pending and does not affect enforcement of rights.<\/p>\nRespondent:<\/h6>\n
\n\u2022 The business name is Dosa Corner Paakashale<\/em><\/strong>, not just Paakashala<\/em><\/strong>, and is visually and phonetically different.
\n\u2022 Use of a generic term cannot amount to infringement.
\n\u2022 A rectification petition has been filed to cancel the registration.
\n\u2022 A newly launched restaurant will suffer if restrained by an injunction.<\/p>\nCourt\u2019s Analysis<\/h5>\n
\n
\n
\n
Findings & Order<\/h5>\n
Relevant Paragraphs<\/h6>\n
Disclaimer<\/h5>\n
Citation<\/h5>\n