Delhi High Court Sends ‘Pind Balluchi’ Trademark Dispute to Arbitration
Court says commercial court exceeded jurisdiction by examining merits at referral stage
Trademark battle between JS Hospitality and Triom Hospitality to be resolved through arbitration
By Our Legal Correspondent
New Delhi: November 26, 2025:
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has referred the ongoing dispute over the use of the “Pind Balluchi” trademark to arbitration. The case, which pits JS Hospitality Services, the registered proprietor of the mark, against Triom Hospitality, highlights the growing importance of arbitration in resolving intellectual property disputes in India.
Also Read: ITAT Delhi Quashes ₹52 Crore Tax Addition in Unlisted Start-Up Shares Case
The decision, delivered by a division bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla, sets aside a commercial court order that had refused to send the matter to arbitration. The High Court stressed that lower courts must not delve into the merits of disputes at the referral stage, reaffirming the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996.
Background of the Case
- JS Hospitality Services owns the registered trademark “Pind Balluchi,” a well-known brand associated with North Indian cuisine and themed restaurants.
- The company alleged that Triom Hospitality was running a restaurant in Dwarka under the same name, amounting to unauthorized use and trademark infringement.
- JS Hospitality approached the commercial court seeking relief.
- The commercial court, however, refused to refer the matter to arbitration and instead conducted a detailed evidentiary inquiry.
Also Read: Supreme Court: Trial Courts Can Order Tenants to Pay Arrears During Eviction Suits
This prompted JS Hospitality to challenge the order before the Delhi High Court.
Court’s Observations
The Delhi High Court made several important observations:
- Jurisdictional Error: The commercial court exceeded its jurisdiction by examining the merits of the dispute at the referral stage.
- Doctrine of Kompetenz-Kompetenz: The High Court emphasized that arbitral tribunals have the authority to rule on their own jurisdiction, including questions of arbitrability.
- Referral to Arbitration: The dispute was referred to arbitration, ensuring that the matter would be resolved by an arbitral tribunal rather than through prolonged litigation.
Also Read: Supreme Court: Justice Needs Human Interpretation, Not Mechanical or AI-Based Application of Laws
The bench noted that entering into the merits at the referral stage defeats the purpose of arbitration and undermines the legislative intent of speedy dispute resolution.
Legal Significance
This ruling is significant for several reasons:
- Trademark Disputes and Arbitration: It reinforces that disputes involving trademark infringement and unauthorized use can be arbitrable, provided they arise out of contractual relationships.
- Judicial Discipline: Courts must refrain from conducting detailed inquiries at the referral stage, respecting the autonomy of arbitral tribunals.
- Ease of Doing Business: By promoting arbitration, the judiciary supports faster resolution of commercial disputes, reducing the burden on courts.
Also Read: ITAT Rules: Purchases Backed by E-Way Bills Are Genuine, Not Bogus
Related Cases and Precedents
The issue of arbitrability of intellectual property disputes has been debated in several cases:
- Booz Allen & Hamilton v. SBI Home Finance (Supreme Court, 2011): The Court distinguished between rights in rem (non-arbitrable) and rights in personam (arbitrable).
- Eros International v. Telemax (Bombay HC, 2016): The court held that copyright disputes arising from contracts are arbitrable.
- Hero Electric Vehicles v. Lectro E-Mobility (Delhi HC, 2021): The court referred a trademark dispute to arbitration, reinforcing the arbitrability of contractual IP disputes.
The Pind Balluchi case adds to this growing body of jurisprudence, confirming that trademark disputes linked to contractual obligations can be resolved through arbitration.
Impact on Businesses
The ruling has several implications for businesses and the hospitality industry:
- Brand Protection: Trademark owners can rely on arbitration as a quicker forum to protect their brands.
- Reduced Litigation: Arbitration helps avoid lengthy court battles, saving time and resources.
- Hospitality Sector: With restaurant chains often expanding through franchise agreements, arbitration provides a reliable mechanism to resolve disputes.
Expert Opinions
Legal experts have welcomed the ruling:
Also Read: India Marks Constitution Day: Remembering Ambedkar and 76 Years of the Nation’s Guiding Document
- Intellectual Property Lawyers: They note that arbitration offers confidentiality and speed, which are crucial in brand-sensitive disputes.
- Corporate Counsel: The decision encourages businesses to include robust arbitration clauses in franchise and licensing agreements.
- Policy Analysts: The ruling aligns with India’s push to strengthen arbitration as a preferred mode of dispute resolution.
Broader Significance
The Delhi High Court’s decision reflects India’s evolving approach to alternative dispute resolution (ADR). By recognizing the arbitrability of trademark disputes, the judiciary is promoting arbitration as a mainstream mechanism for resolving commercial conflicts.
This is particularly relevant in sectors like hospitality, entertainment, and technology, where intellectual property plays a central role. The ruling also supports India’s ambition to become a global hub for arbitration.
Conclusion
The Delhi High Court’s referral of the “Pind Balluchi” trademark dispute to arbitration is a landmark judgment that strengthens the role of arbitration in intellectual property disputes. By setting aside the commercial court’s order and emphasizing judicial restraint at the referral stage, the court has reinforced the principle of kompetenz-kompetenz and promoted faster, fairer dispute resolution.
For businesses, the message is clear: include arbitration clauses in contracts and rely on ADR mechanisms to protect your rights. This not only ensures quicker outcomes but also reduces the burden of prolonged litigation.
🔑 Suggested Keywords for SEO (Google + ChatGPT)
- Delhi High Court Pind Balluchi case
- Pind Balluchi trademark dispute arbitration
- JS Hospitality vs Triom Hospitality Delhi HC
- Trademark arbitration India
- Delhi HC arbitration ruling 2025
- Intellectual property disputes arbitration India
- Hospitality industry trademark case Delhi HC
- Kompetenz-kompetenz arbitration India
- Delhi High Court trademark litigation
- Arbitration in trademark disputes India