Domino’s vs Dominick: Delhi HC restrains Ghaziabad-based restaurant from using historical name of American pizza chain

“A perusal of the record shows that the Defendants have used the name ‘Dominick Pizza’, which is nothing but the identical historical name of the Plaintiff’s store,” said the court, adding that ‘Dominick’ is integrally and historically associated with Domino’s and the use of an identical name in a similar logo form for pizzas would be confusing and deceptive in nature.

The court further said that the dishonesty in adopting a similar name is further strengthened by the fact that the defendants are copying various flavour variants of Dominos. One of the customer reviews on Google clearly shows that there is a complete confusion being caused, it added.

“The manner of the listings of the Defendant No. 1 on various social media platforms and online ordering platforms leaves no doubt in the mind of the Court that the name and business of the Defendant No. 1 is being confused as that of the Plaintiffs’ outlets. The reviews of the consumers on Google Reviews also re-affirms this fact that apart from the confusion that is taking place, there is severe tarnishment and dilution of the Plaintiffs’ mark and business,” said the court, while granting the ex-parte ad interim injunction in favour of Domino’s.

Dominos in the suit before the court said Dominick Pizza, through its proprietor Sandeep Kumar Sharma, is using a deceptively similar logo, mark, and trade name – ‘Dominick Pizza’ – and also unauthorisedly using its other registered trademarks, such as ‘Cheese Burst’ and ‘Pasta Italiano’. Advocate Pravin Anand, of ‘Anand and Anand’, who is representing Domino’s, told the court there are several other Google reviews which reveal customers have placed online Zomato orders with Dominick Pizza, while thinking that an order is being placed with Domino’s.

Issuing summons to Dominick Pizza, the court asked it to file written statement within 30 days.