Protecting the Skies: Bombay HC Cleanses Trademark Register of 'Bad Faith' Copycats

In a significant move to guard the sanctity of well-known brands, the Bombay High Court has ordered the removal of the trademark "Vistarraah" from the Register of Trade Marks. The judgment, delivered by Justice Arif S. Doctor, serves as a stern reminder that trademark law will not tolerate attempts to "ride on the coattails" of established, well-known brands.

A Dispute Grounded in Reputation

The petitioner, TATA SIA Airlines Limited—the entity behind the acclaimed "VISTARA®" airline brand—approached the court via a Commercial Miscellaneous Petition seeking the rectification of the Register. The heart of their grievance was the registration of the mark “Vistarraah” in Class 31, which covers agricultural, horticultural, and animal-related goods.

The petitioner, which has been operational since 2015, established that its "VISTARA®" mark had been declared a "well-known" trade mark by the Delhi High Court in 2019. The company argued that the respondent, Girish Basrimalani, had adopted a phonetically identical and visually similar mark with the clear intent of exploiting the reputation, goodwill, and distinctive character associated with their airline services.

The Anatomy of 'Bad Faith'

The legal battle exposed a pattern of behavior by the respondent. Not only did the respondent remain absent during the proceedings despite being served, but evidence revealed a history of filing for identical marks across various classes—only to withdraw or abandon them when challenged by the petitioner.

Counsel for the petitioner argued that this "serial filing" strategy demonstrated an utter lack of bona fide intention to use the mark, characterizing it as a deliberate effort to squat on intellectual property. Justice Doctor’s bench took a dim view of this conduct, noting that a register polluted by bad-faith applications undermines the very mechanism designed to offer protection to genuine businesses.

Legal Analysis and Precedent

The High Court’s reasoning was anchored in Sections 9, 11, and 57 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 . The court emphasized that even where goods and services appear distinct—such as aviation services versus agricultural goods—the law prohibits registration if the likelihood of confusion exists.

Citing the Supreme Court’s ruling in * Corn Products Refining Co. v. Shangrila Food Products Ltd. * and the principle established in Khoday Distilleries Limited v. Scotch Whisky Association , the court reiterated that trademarks adopted in bad faith fail the test of statutory protection. The court found that "Vistarraah" was not only confusingly similar to "VISTARA®" but that the respondent had failed to provide any justification for their adoption of the name.

Key Observations

The judgment offers clear guidance on the protection of reputable marks:

• On the Likelihood of Confusion: "The stylisation adopted by Respondent No.1 does not alter the overall commercial impression conveyed to the average consumer through imperfect recollection. Thus, the likelihood of confusion among members of the public and trade alike was imminent."
• On Bad Faith: "Respondent No.1 was specifically made aware of the same and the Petitioner’s rights owing to cease-and-desist notices, opposition proceedings, and this rectification petition. Despite this, Respondent No.1 persisted in maintaining the impugned registration. Such conduct is ... clearly in bad faith."
• On the Purity of the Register: "As recognised in Khoday Distilleries and Ciba Ltd., marks adopted without bona fide intent or in bad faith undermine the purity of the Register and are liable to be removed."

The Verdict: A Clean Slate

Declaring the petition successful, Justice Arif S. Doctor directed the Trade Marks Registry to rectify the records by removing the "Vistarraah" registration entirely.

This ruling reinforces the judiciary’s role as the guardian of commercial integrity. For companies, the takeaway is clear: while legitimate expansion is protected, courts will not hesitate to strike down registrations that are intended to deceive the public or unfairly dilute the reputation of well-known Indian brands. By purging the register of "bad faith" marks, the Bombay High Court has ensured that the marketplace remains a landscape of fair competition rather than one of parasitic imitation.