9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (5) TMI 188X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... laintiff has contended that it was established in the year 1917 and is the principal investment holding company of the Tata Group, which is India‟s oldest, largest and best-known conglomerate with a turnover of USD 9 Billion. The name TATA is stated to be have been derived from the surname of its founder Mr. Jamsetji Nusserwanji Tata. It is also stated that the name TATA is being used by the plaintiffs since its inception in the year 1917 and it is claimed that on account of its highly descriptive nature and pioneering activities of the founder, the name TATA has consistently been associated with and exclusively denotes the conglomeration of companies forming the Tata group, which is known for high quality of products manufactured and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecorded with the Trade Marks Registry in India in accordance with the relevant provisions of law. 5. The plaintiff submits that as a result of extensive use of the plaintiff‟s trade mark TATA over a long period of time spanning a wide geographical area coupled with vast promotion and publicity, the trade mark TATA has acquired an impeccable and unparalleled reputation and goodwill and has come about to acquire the status of „well-known trade mark‟. It submits that reputed and well-known trade marks especially those that embody an aura of preeminent excellence and quality, such as the plaintiff‟s trade mark TATA are entitled to the highest degree of protection against any third party misuse, even in relation to diffe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A amounts to infringement of the registered trade mark, as also passing off by the defendants as per the provisions of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. 7. The plaintiff states that the defendants activities are undoubtedly motivated by malafides, and that their choice of the mark TATA ws not a mere coincidence but led by an ulterior motive to misappropriate and trade upon the goodwill land reputation of the plaintiff‟s trade mark. The plaintiff further states that, by being tainted at its very inception, no amount of subsequent use can cleanse the defendants‟ vice of dishonest adaptation of the mark TATA GOLD. And that by adopting the plaintiff‟s trade mark, the defendant is trying to derive an unfair advantage in the consumer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... names. I have heard the arguments of the Counsel for the plaintiff. I have also perused through the evidence placed on record. 10. Before proceeding to decide the matter, it is pertinent to note that the Trade Marks Act, 1999 accords statutory protection to well-known marks. Section 29(4) of the Act, which is relevant in this regard is as under. "29(4) A registered trade mark is infringed by a person who, not being a registered proprietor or a person using by way of permitted use, uses in the course of trade, a mark which - (a) Is identical with or similar to the registered trade mark; and (b) Is used in relation to goods or services which are not similar to those for which the trade mark is registered; (c) The registered trade mark h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1999. The use of the trade mark TATA in relation to any goods or services, is therefore, likely to be taken as a connection between House of Tata and the goods or services, which are sold under this trade mark or a trade mark which is similar to it. 12. Further, in the AK Chaudhary Case (supra), this Court has also made pertinent observations regarding passing off under the doctrine of dilution and unfair competition. The Court observed:- "According to the doctrine of dilution, even if a person uses another's well-known trademark or trade mark similar thereto for goods or services that are not similar to those provided by such other person, although it does not cause confusion among the consumers as to the source of goods or services, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
