Chennai, Jan 22 (NationPress) The Madras High Court has chosen to reserve its orders in a trademark infringement case brought forth by Sangeetha Caterers and Consultants LLP, the proprietors of the renowned vegetarian restaurant chain 'Sangeetha' based in Chennai. This suit is against its former franchisees who currently operate under the brand 'Geetham' throughout the city.

Justice Senthilkumar Ramamoorthy decided to defer his ruling after listening to comprehensive arguments from senior counsel A.K. Sriram on behalf of the plaintiff and senior counsel P.S. Raman, who represents the defendants led by Rasnam Foods Pvt. Ltd..

The judge has also allowed both parties to consider an out-of-court settlement prior to the issuance of any orders and has granted permission to revisit the matter if a settlement is reached.

Documenting the proceedings, the court remarked: "Both parties have concluded their arguments. The judgment is reserved. Since both sides have expressed a willingness to amicably resolve the matter, they are granted permission to revisit the issue should they achieve a settlement."

During the proceedings, advocate Raman argued that the possibility of a settlement would be realistic only if the claim was capped at around Rs 3 crore, rather than the Rs 130 crore sought by the plaintiff. He urged the court to reserve its judgment and allow time for negotiations.

In presenting the case, Sriram stated that 'Sangeetha', which was established in 1985 by P. Suresh and P. Rajagopal, has developed into a prestigious brand with 29 outlets in Chennai and an additional 21 internationally, built on decades of goodwill and loyal customers. In 2009, franchise rights were granted to Rasnam Foods to manage a 'Sangeetha' outlet in Velachery, followed by more locations in Thoraipakkam, Medavakkam, T. Nagar, Navalur, and at the Tata Consultancy Services Siruseri campus.

After the franchisees parted ways in 2022, all 'Sangeetha' outlets were shut down on May 31 of that year.

However, starting the very next day, Rasnam Foods and its affiliated entities began operating restaurants in the same locations under the name 'Geetham', which the plaintiff contended is deceptively similar to 'Sangeetha' and was adopted with the intention of capitalizing on its long-established goodwill.

In response to these allegations, Raman claimed that the conflict arose from the plaintiff's refusal in 2022 to approve the relocation of a struggling Medavakkam outlet impacted by nearby Metro Rail construction. He argued that 'Sangeetha' had voluntarily allowed the franchisees to leave, assuming they would not thrive independently, and questioned why the infringement case was initiated only one year after 'Geetham' began operating successfully.

On the continued use of the same locations, he mentioned that advance rent had been paid to landlords. He also highlighted that 'Geetham' had modified its logo colors following interim court mandates and had published full-page ads in major newspapers, clarifying it had no ties to 'Sangeetha'.

"What more can I do to separate myself from my former principal?" he concluded his arguments.