Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
TATA SONS PRIVATE LIMITED – Appellant
Versus
ANILBHAI M AMRUTIYA & ANR. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
AMIT BANSAL, J.
CS (COMM) 598/2023 & I.A. 42672/2024 (Under Order XIII-A of the CPC seeking summary judgment against defendants)
1. The present suit has been filed seeking relief of permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringing the well-known trademark of the plaintiff, passing off their goods and services as that of the plaintiff, along with other ancillary reliefs.
PLEADINGS IN THE PLAINT
2. The plaintiff, Tata Sons Private Limited, is a company duly incorporated in the year 1917 as a body corporate under the Indian Companies Act, 1913. The plaintiff is the promoter and principal investment holding company of various TATA Companies, and is India’s oldest, largest, most trusted and best-known business conglomerate.
3. The plaintiff, being the holding company of the TATA Group of Companies, represents its own and the interests of all Tata companies, as also the image and reputation of the name and well-known trademark TATA and permutations/combinations thereof. The plaintiff is the owner and registered proprietor of the well-known mark TATA and permutations/combinations thereof in class 9 which is the relevant class for the purposes of the instant suit. The t
Trademark infringement occurs when parties use marks that are identical or deceptively similar, causing confusion; summary judgment is appropriate when defendants fail to contest claims or provide a ....
Trademark infringement and passing off of a well-known mark, and the grant of permanent injunction and damages as remedies.
Permanent injunction granted to prevent trademark infringement, passing off, and dilution, reflecting an amicable resolution and agreement by the parties.
The court granted a summary judgment for trademark infringement due to the defendants' failure to contest the claims, establishing the plaintiff's rights in the 'MILLENNIUM' mark.
Summary judgment can be granted in commercial disputes when the defendant lacks real prospects of successfully defending the claim.
Trademark infringement occurs when identical or confusingly similar marks serve identical services, creating potential consumer confusion.
The court affirmed that summary judgment can be granted when a defendant lacks a real prospect of successfully defending against claims of trademark infringement.
Trademark infringement under Section 29(2)(b) of the Trade Marks Act was established based on the likelihood of confusion among consumers due to the defendants' use of a mark similar to the plaintiff....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
