Delhi High Court trademark ruling

Delhi High Court Rules Numbers Can Be Trademarks; “2929” Gets Green Light for Cosmetics

by

In a significant decision that may reshape the way brands use numerals in their trademarks, the Delhi High Court has ruled that purely numerical combinations like “2929” can be valid trademarks under Indian law—provided they are distinctive.

The ruling came in response to a plea by Vineet Kapur, who had applied for the trademark “2929” in Class 3 (which covers cosmetics and similar products). The application, filed in September 2021, was initially refused by the Trademark Registry on the grounds that it lacked distinctiveness and merely consisted of common numerals.

However, Justice Mini Pushkarna of the Delhi High Court set aside the Registry’s refusal, stating that the Trade Marks Act, 1999, explicitly allows numerals to be part of trademarks. The Court emphasized that distinctiveness is the key requirement—just like it is for word marks or logos.> “There is no bar in the Trade Marks Act against numerals being used as trademarks,” the Court observed. “An arbitrary number such as 2929, which has no direct reference to the goods, is capable of being distinctive.”The Court directed that the mark “2929” be advertised in the Trade Marks Journal, allowing time for any opposition proceedings. However, it clarified that the applicant cannot claim exclusive rights over individual digits like “2” or “9.”

Precedent-Setting Ruling

This judgment breaks new ground in Indian trademark law, where courts have traditionally focused on wordmarks and logos. While numeric trademarks have been allowed in some earlier cases, such as “501” for Tata Oil Mills and “1001” in other contexts, this is one of the first detailed High Court verdicts dealing specifically with numeric distinctiveness without acquired secondary meaning.Kapur’s application was based on proposed use, meaning he had not used the trademark in commerce at the time of filing. The Court clarified that proof of usage is not necessary in such cases if the mark is inherently distinctive.Legal experts believe this decision could encourage a rise in numeric trademark filings, especially in industries like fashion, cosmetics, and technology, where short, memorable numbers can play a strong branding role.

Implications for Brand Owners

The ruling provides clarity for businesses considering the use of standalone numbers as part of their brand identity. While arbitrary numeric combinations are now more defensible, experts caution that marks may still face opposition if they resemble existing trademarks or lack uniqueness in a particular market.The judgment also underlines the importance of filing trademark applications promptly and crafting distinctive brand elements—numerical or otherwise.

What’s Next

Following the ruling, the mark “2929” will now proceed to advertisement in the Trade Marks Journal. Third parties will have an opportunity to file oppositions before the mark is finally registered. Meanwhile, legal analysts expect a surge in interest around numeral-based trademarks.—Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. All brand names and trademarks mentioned herein are property of their respective owners.

Delhi High Court Grants Interim Relief to Burger Singh in Trademark Infringement Dispute

by

In a significant development for brand protection in India’s fast-food industry, the Delhi High Court has granted interim relief to homegrown quick-service restaurant chain Burger Singh in a trademark infringement case. The court’s order restrains a former franchisee from continuing to use the company’s trademark following the termination of their business relationship.

Background of the Dispute

The legal action was initiated by Tipping Mr Pink Pvt. Ltd., the parent company of Burger Singh, after it discovered that one of its former franchisees in Patna, Bihar, continued operating under the “Burger Singh” name and associated branding, even after the franchise agreement was terminated.

The plaintiff alleged that the unauthorized use of its registered trademark and distinctive branding elements, including logos and packaging, was causing confusion among customers and harming the brand’s reputation. The company claimed this constituted trademark infringement and passing off.

Court’s Observations and Ruling

The Delhi High Court, after reviewing the documents and hearing initial arguments, found merit in the plaintiff’s claim and issued an interim injunction. The court directed the former franchisee to immediately cease the use of the “Burger Singh” mark or any deceptively similar brand name, logos, or signage until the final adjudication of the matter.

The order was passed by Justice Sanjeev Narula, who stated that prima facie evidence suggested that the continued use of the brand by the ex-franchisee could mislead the public and unjustly exploit the goodwill and market recognition of the original brand.

Legal Counsel and Representation

Burger Singh was represented by Advocate Jayant Kumar, who argued that allowing the former franchisee to operate under the same name post-termination would undermine the integrity of the trademark system and violate the terms of the franchise agreement.

The legal team also emphasized that continued misuse of the brand identity posed a risk of irreparable harm, especially in an industry where consumer loyalty is deeply tied to brand perception and consistency.

Impact and Industry Significance

This interim relief reinforces the rights of franchisors in India to protect their intellectual property, even after a franchise agreement has ended. The order sends a strong signal to franchisees about the legal risks of unauthorized brand use and the importance of adhering to contractual obligations.

The judgment is expected to set a precedent for similar disputes, particularly as the Indian food and beverage sector witnesses rapid expansion through franchising models. It also underlines the importance of trademark registration and enforcement as key tools in brand management.

What Lies Ahead

The case will now proceed to the next phase, where the court will hear further arguments, review contractual documentation, and assess damages, if any. The outcome of the full trial will determine whether a permanent injunction is warranted and if the plaintiff is entitled to any compensatory relief.

Meanwhile, Burger Singh continues to operate more than 100 outlets across India and abroad, and the company has reiterated its commitment to maintaining brand integrity through strict legal compliance and oversight.