JUDGMENT
A.P. Shah, J.
1. Mr. Shah for the defendants waive service. By consent, Notice of Motion is taken up for final hearing. This is an action for infringement of trade mark and passing off. The plaintiffs carry business of restaurant chain under the name TACO BELL selling Mexican style food products. The plaintiffs are operating over 6000 TACO BELL restaurants worldwide. Both in the United States and other countries, the plaintiffs use the trade mark TACO BELL and TACO BELL, logo in different versions. The sales of the plaintiffs are in the range of six billion dollars per year. As the proprietor of the trade mark TACO BELL and TACO BELL, logo, the plaintiffs have secured registration of the said trade mark in more than 70 countries. In India the trade mark TACO BELL and TACO BELL logo in classes 29 & 30 are registered in the name of the 1st plaintiff company. The plaintiffs say that their restaurants in various countries are frequently visited by the Indians during abroad. In addition to goodwill and reputation enjoyed by the plaintiff, TACO BELL is known in India by means of media publicity and advertisements in leading international magazines and trade journals.
2. The plaintiffs have alleged that it recently came to their knowledge that the defendants have started a restaurant by name TACO BELL selling Mexican food in the said restaurant. It appears that defendants are also selling package food items from their restaurant under the name TACO BELL. The plaintiffs say that this coupled with the fact that signboard indicating that it also serves Mexican food is obviously motivated by intention to trade upon the benefit from the reputation enjoyed by the plaintiffs worldwide status as a leader in Mexican style restaurant foods and services provided under TACO BELL mark. The plaintiffs are, therefore, seeking an injunction restraining the defendants from using the mark TACO BELL. In reply filed on behalf of the defendants, the defendant No. 2 says that he has honestly adopted the word TACO BELL without the knowledge of the plaintiff's mark in respect of the restaurant business. He says that on perusal of the Concise English Dictionary, he came across the word TACO which means Mexican food in folded or rolled tortilla which rang the bell and, therefore, he adopted the word TACO BELL without any intent to copy the name of the plaintiffs or otherwise. The explanation given by the defendants is totally absurd and cannot be accepted. I have not the slightest hesitation to hold that the defendants have dishonestly adopted the mark of the plaintiffs in order to trade upon the reputation of the plaintiffs. It is impossible to believe that the defendant was not aware of the TACO BELL chain of restaurants and he invented the word Tacobell while reading the dictionary. It appears that the defendants were initially carrying on the business in the name of DUNHILL FAST FOOD. It is difficult to accept that by sheer chance the defendants hit upon the name TACO BELL. The intention appears to be to trade upon the famous mark of the plaintiffs. The plaintiffs have produced on record the affidavits of three responsible citizens to the effect that they were led to believe that the defendants' Mexican restaurant is the branch of the plaintiffs. I have, therefore, no hesitation to grant interim reliefs to the plaintiff. The Notice of Motion is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (a) & (b) which read as under:--
(a) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendants itself, its proprietors, partners, servants, subordinates, representatives, stockists, dealers, agents and all other persons claiming under them or acting in concert with them be restrained by an order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from carrying on any restaurant or similar business under or by reference to the name TACO BELL or any other mark resembling the mark TACOBELL/TACOBELL logo and from using the mark TACO BELL/TACOBELL logo or any mark resembling the mark TACOBELL/TACOBELL logo in any manner in relation to the restaurant business or food products sold/served by the Defendants and from using the mark TACOBELL/TACOBELL logo or any mark resembling the mark TACOBELL/TACOBELL logo upon sign boards, menu cards or napkins or paper napkins, so as to pass of or enable others to pass of the Defendants business/goods as those of the Plaintiff and from in any other manner passing off or attempting to pass of or causing, enabling or assisting others to pass of any restaurant or similar business not being the Plaintiff's business or a business connected with the Plaintiff as or for the business of or a business connected with the Plaintiff;
(b) That pending the hearing and final disposal of the suit, the Defendants itself, its proprietors, partners, servants, subordinates, representatives, stockists, dealers, agents, and all other persons claiming under them or acting in concert with them be restrained by an order and injunction of this Hon'ble Court from using upon or in relation to its restaurant business/foodproducts/signboards/menucards/napkins/papernapkins the impugned marks TACO BELL and TACO BELL logo or any other mark deceptively similar to the Plaintiff's trade marks TACO BELL and TACO BELL logo, and from infringing in any manner the Plaintiff's statutory rights in the said trade marks TACO BELL and TACO BELL logo bearing registration Nos. 477178, 477179, 477180 and 477181 in Classes 29 and 30.
The defendants are given four weeks time to comply with this order. Ad-interim order to continue till the defendants make the necessary change in the signboard and effect other necessary changes.