Delhi High Court stays release of film 'Ajinomoto' after MSG manufacturer files suit

Delhi High Court stays release of film 'Ajinomoto' after MSG manufacturer files suit

The matter will be heard on 12 December

The Delhi High Court has temporarily restrained the release of a Tamil film titled 'Ajinomoto' after a Japanese Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) manufacturer Ajinomoto Inc filed a trademark infringement suit.

In the Ajinomoto Co Inc vs Dattatrey Studios & Anr case, Justice Sanjeev Narula held, "The plaintiff has made out a prima facie case in its favor; the balance of convenience also lies in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants. In case an ex-parte injunction is not granted, the plaintiff would suffer irreparable loss."

Ajinomoto Inc sought a permanent injunction restraining infringement of its registered trademark 'Aji-No-Moto.' It contended that the use of the title by the filmmakers not only infringed the plaintiff's trademark rights but was also disparaging and defaming. In the film's context, the director, Mathiraj Iyamperumal made false public statements in relation to the plaintiff's mark.

The petitioner drew the attention of the court to an article in Outlook magazine, which published the director's statements.

It read that Iyamperumal said, "'Ajinomoto' is a flavor enhancer. But it is in fact a kind of poison that kills humans slowly. The story of 'Ajinomoto' has been conceived and crafted based on the concept of the cooking ingredient. Certain situations in the film will make some of the characters look good at one point. But just like the ingredient can cause great danger, subsequently, these characters can indulge in actions that can cause difficult consequences."

The petitioner argued that although the film was not yet released and its contents not known to the public, it was blatantly clear that the storyline (as per the director's statements), was conceived and fashioned metaphorically around the cooking ingredient, linking it directly to the plaintiff.

It added that considering the wide outreach of films, and the way the storyline was conceived, any negative portrayal was bound to severely prejudice the plaintiff's reputation and product in the market.

Ajinomoto Inc pointed out that the film was not yet certified by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and the title of the film was subject to change, in view of the Supreme Court decision in the Babuji Rawji Shah vs S Hussain Zaidi & Ors case.

Thus, the court restrained the defendants from releasing the film under the title 'Ajinomoto' or any other deceptively similar name until 12 December, the next date of hearing.

Team Anand and Anand represented Ajinomoto Inc. in this case. The team comprised of Pravin Anand, Dhruv Anand, Udita Patro, Swati Jain, Sampurnaa Sanyal and Nimrat Singh