ADVERTISEMENT

Pune's Burger King Wins Case Against Global Giant To Retain Name

Burger King filed a lawsuit in 2011 after discovering that an Irani couple in Pune was using the same name for their burger joint.

<div class="paragraphs"><p>Representational image. Photo courtesy: Envato</p></div>
Representational image. Photo courtesy: Envato

A Pune court has ruled in favour of the local Burger King after a 13-year legal battle. The case, filed by the US-based Burger King Corporation, sought to stop the local business from using the name and demanded compensation. The court threw out the case on August 16.

Burger King has used its name since 1954 and has it registered in over 122 countries, including India. They filed a lawsuit in 2011 after discovering that an Irani couple in Pune was using the same name for their burger joint. Burger King claimed that this is a violation of their trademark and asked the court to stop the popular Pune-based burger joint from using the name and to pay damages.

The couple argued that they’ve been using the name "Burger King" since 1992, long before the global chain entered India. They said they didn’t intend to copy or mislead anyone, and there’s no confusion between their restaurant and the international brand. They also claim that Burger King wasn’t known in India at the time.

The couple made a counter claim against the US- based fast food chain seeking compensation of Rs. 20 lakhs arguing that Burger King's legal actions have hurt their business.

Opinion
Karnataka High Court Refuses To Stay Service Charge Limit On Ola, Uber, Rapido

However, the court found that both parties didn’t provide enough evidence to support their claims for damages. The court also found that the US-based Burger King's request to stop Pune Couple from using the same name can also not be agreed upon due to the lack of evidence.

Resultantly, the 13 year old battle ended with the famous Pune based joint being free to use the name "Burger King".

Opinion
PM Modi Reiterates Call For Uniform Civil Code, Says Existing Laws Discriminatory