LAWYER SIBLING LOGO (1)
  • Home
  • Blogs
  • News
  • Updates
  • Constitution
    • Constitutional Laws
  • Laws
    • Civil Law
    • Criminal Law
    • Family Law
    • Real Estate Law
    • Business Law
    • Cyber & IT Law
    • Employee Law
    • Finance Law
    • International Law
  • Special Act
    • Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act)
    • Consumer Protection Act
    • Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Act (NDPS)
    • The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO)
  • Bare Act

Delhi High Court bars Sanjay Dutt-backed firm from using Godfather trademark for whisky

22/06/2026BlogNo Comments

The Delhi High Court has restrained Cartel Bros, a company backed by actor Sanjay Dutt, from manufacturing, marketing and selling whisky under the trademark “Godfather” during the pendency of a trademark infringement suit filed by Devans Modern Breweries.

The single-judge Bench of Justice Tushar Rao Gedela passed an interim injunction in favour of Devans Modern Breweries, holding that the plaintiff had established a prima facie case warranting protection of its trademark rights pending adjudication of the dispute.

The Court restrained Cartel Bros, along with its successors, assigns, partners, directors and all persons acting on its behalf, from manufacturing, bottling, marketing, selling, offering for sale, advertising, exporting or otherwise using the marks “Godfather”, “Godfather’s” or any deceptively similar mark, label, packaging, trade dress or representation in relation to whisky products until further orders.

The Court also directed the defendants to remove all advertisements, listings, promotional material, social media posts and other content bearing the impugned mark or any confusingly similar variation in relation to alcoholic beverages from all platforms.

The order was passed in a suit filed by Devans Modern Breweries, which claimed proprietorship over the Godfather trademark since 1984 in relation to beer and asserted that it also holds trademark registrations for whisky and rum. The company contended that the mark had acquired substantial goodwill, reputation and distinctiveness over four decades of continuous commercial use and had become exclusively associated with its products in the minds of consumers.

According to the plaintiff, Godfather was an arbitrary and inherently distinctive trademark entitled to a high degree of legal protection under trademark law. It argued that the use of an identical mark by Cartel Bros for whisky was likely to cause consumer confusion, deception and dilution of its proprietary rights.

Cartel Bros opposed the plea and submitted that it had modified its branding to use the expression “The Glenwalk Godfather’s by Sanjay Dutt” and did not intend to use the standalone mark “The Godfather”. The company further offered to withdraw its trademark application for the standalone mark if permitted to continue using the revised label.

The defendant also argued that Devans had not undertaken substantial commercial use of the “Godfather” trademark in relation to whisky in recent years and therefore could not claim exclusive rights over the mark for that product segment.

After hearing the submissions, the Court held that Devans had succeeded in establishing a prima facie case, noting that denial of interim protection could result in irreparable injury to the plaintiff’s trademark rights and goodwill. The High Court granted interim injunctive relief restraining the use of the disputed mark pending final adjudication of the suit.

The post Delhi High Court bars Sanjay Dutt-backed firm from using Godfather trademark for whisky appeared first on India Legal.

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Recent Posts

  • Delhi High Court bars Sanjay Dutt-backed firm from using Godfather trademark for whisky
  • AITC moves Calcutta High Court against freezing of party bank accounts
  • Supreme Court disposes of plea after CBSE formulates fresh assessment policy for Class XII private students in West Asia
  • Karnataka High Court refuses stay on proceedings against dermatologist in Nandini misinformation case
  • Allahabad High Court declines urgent hearing on pleas seeking CBI probe into Ram Mandir Trust funds

Recent Comments

  1. Phone Tracking In India - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  2. Section 437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA
  3. The Evolution of Indian Penal Code 1860: Key Provisions and Relevance Today - lawyer Sibling on The Constitution of INDIA

Follow us for more

Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
YouTube
Instagram
DisclaimerPrivacy PolicyTerms and Conditions
All Rights Reserved © 2023
  • Login
  • Sign Up
Forgot Password?
Lost your password? Please enter your username or email address. You will receive a link to create a new password via email.