The Delhi High Court has recently expressed strong disapproval of Meta Platforms Inc., the parent company of Facebook, for showing a "lack of initiative" in a long-running trademark dispute against a Bengaluru-based bakery chain. The court's remarks came during a hearing on Meta's plea to execute a 2022 order it had won against Ehrlich Foods and Beverages Pvt. Ltd.
Background of the 'Facebake' Trademark Dispute
In July 2022, a bench of the Delhi High Court had ruled in favour of Meta, granting a permanent injunction against the food company. The court had restrained the bakery from using the marks 'FACEBAKE' and 'FACECAKE', deeming them deceptively similar to Meta's renowned 'FACEBOOK' trademark. The order also covered the website domain facebake.in and associated email IDs.
As part of the 2022 judgment, the court had awarded Meta nominal damages of Rs 50,000 and legal costs of approximately Rs 2 lakh. The bakery company, which operates 53 outlets in Bengaluru on a franchise model, subsequently rebranded to 'BUNCAKE' in compliance with the order.
Court Finds Meta Delayed Accepting Awarded Money
Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora, while hearing Meta's execution plea on December 24, 2025, highlighted a significant lapse on the part of the social media giant. The court observed that the bakery company had repeatedly requested Meta's bank details to transfer the court-awarded sum of nearly Rs 2.5 lakh.
However, Meta failed to provide these details in a timely manner. The funds were finally remitted only in September 2025, more than three years after the original order. "This court finds that it was the decree holder (Meta) who exhibited a lack of initiative in accepting the monies awarded under the decree," Justice Arora stated.
Bakery Complied, Meta's Contempt Plea Dismissed
The High Court noted that Ehrlich Foods had taken appropriate steps to comply with the permanent injunction, which the court clarified is "perpetual" in nature. The bench found no wilful or deliberate disobedience by the bakery company.
Meta had also invoked the court's contempt jurisdiction, alleging continued use of infringing marks and online listings. Advocate J V Abhay, representing Meta, argued that the bakery undertook to pay the amount but did so only after repeated execution proceedings.
However, advocate Haneesh Krishnan, representing the bakery's director, emphasized their respect for the court's orders and their complete rebranding effort. After considering the substantial compliance and absence of wilful disobedience, Justice Arora found Meta's sought reliefs to be "misconceived" and not liable to be granted.
Implications and Future Enforcement
The court's December 24 order reinforces the 2022 permanent injunction. It stated that if Ehrlich Foods violates the order in the future, Meta would be at liberty to approach the court for enforcement. The ruling underscores the importance of prompt action by decree-holders in litigation and acknowledges good-faith compliance by the opposing party.
This case, originating from a Bengaluru bakery's playful naming, has culminated in a significant judicial observation on the conduct of a global tech giant in Indian legal proceedings.
