Defendants using marks like "Domin'd Pizza" and "Domind's Pizza" held to infringe Domino's well-known trademarks; permanent injunction issued against defendants operating through shared cloud kitchens.
In a significant intellectual property rights ruling, the Delhi High Court has pronounced a summary judgment in favor of Dominos IP Holder LLC and Jubilant FoodWorks Limited, restraining several defendants from using trade names deceptively similar to the registered "Domino's Pizza" trademark. The suit was filed under CS(COMM) 461/2024, with the judgment delivered on October 8, 2026, by Justice Purushaindra Kumar Kaurav.
The plaintiffs, representing the globally renowned Domino's Pizza brand, contended that the defendants-operating various food outlets and cloud kitchens under names such as "Domin'd Pizza," "Domind's Pizza," and "Domzz Pizza"-engaged in trademark infringement and passing off. These marks were found to be phonetically and visually deceptively similar to Domino's registered trademarks, potentially misleading consumers.
The Court noted that the defendants had systematically exploited online food delivery platforms like Zomato and Swiggy. The defendants' outlets appeared prominently through search prompts triggered by consumers typing initial letters of "Domino's" (such as "DOM," "DOMI," or "DOMIN"). This strategy was held to deliberately confuse consumers, including semi-literate individuals or those unfamiliar with English, into believing they were ordering from the genuine Domino's establishment.
Further investigation revealed that defendants numbered 5 to 7 were operating through shared physical and cloud kitchens in multiple Delhi localities, including Karol Bagh, Inderlok, and Tis Hazari. These outlets shared common proprietorship under Mr. Vimal Kumar Trivedi, as established by identical or related FSSAI registrations. The Court found this coordinated use of similar trade names to be a systematic effort to create an impression of affiliation with the plaintiffs.
While some defendants (Nos. 1 to 4) opted for an amicable settlement, defendants 5 to 7 remained absent throughout the proceedings despite proper service of notices. The Court proceeded ex parte against them and found no plausible defense to the allegations of infringement. Notably, the plaintiffs chose not to press for damages and costs, focusing primarily on obtaining injunctive relief.
Recalling previous rulings by the same Court that emphasized the higher degree of care required in food-related trademarks to prevent consumer deception, Justice Kaurav granted a permanent injunction against defendants 5 to 7. The defendants were restrained from advertising, selling, or marketing any products using the infringing marks or deceptively similar variations. Additionally, the defendants were ordered to deliver up all infringing products and materials for destruction or erasure.
The Court's ruling underscores the judiciary's firm stance against the deliberate exploitation of well-known trademarks in the food service industry, particularly when consumer confusion risks compromising quality and brand reputation. The judgment also highlights the increasing importance of monitoring online platforms to curb trademark violations.
The suit stands disposed of with the decree to be drawn accordingly.
Bottom Line:
Trade Mark infringement and passing off - Defendants using marks such as "Domin'd Pizza", "Domind's Pizza" and "Domzz Pizza" for identical goods/services were held to be deceptively similar to plaintiffs' well-known "Domino's" marks - Ex parte defendants had no plausible defence - Summary judgment granted and permanent injunction issued.
Statutory provision(s):
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 Order XIII-A Rules 3 and 6(1)(a), Order VIII Rule 10, Section 151; Trade Marks Act, 1999
Dominos IP Holder LLC v. M/s Domin'd Pizza, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2998083
