*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

RESERVED ON : 3^rd NOVEMBER, 2014

DECIDED ON : 25^th NOVEMBER, 2014

+

CS (OS) 734/2013

VIRGIN ENTERPRISES LTD. & ANR.

..... Plaintiffs

Through :

Mr.Amitabha Sen, Advocate with

Ms.Malyashree Sridharan &

Mr.Nihit Nagpal, Advocates.

VERSUS

VIRGIN PARADISE AIRLINES TRAINING PVT. LTD.

..... Defendant

Through :

None.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.P.GARG

S.P.GARG, J.

1.

The plaintiffs have instituted the present suit for permanent

injunction to restrain the defendant from infringing their trademark and

passing off their services as that of his. Briefly stated, the facts set up in

the plaint are as under :

2.

The plaintiff No.1 – Virgin Enterprises Limited is a member

of the Virgin Group of Companies. It was originally established by Sir

2014:DHC:6383

Richard Branson in 1970. It is a company incorporated in England and

Wales and is a member of the Group of Companies collectively known as

the Virgin Group of Companies. Plaintiff No.2 – Virgin Mobile India Pvt.

Ltd. having its registered office at 2A, Old Ishwar Nagar, Main Mathura

Road, New Delhi, is a licencee of the plaintiff No.1. The plaintiffs were

licenced to use the ‘Virgin’ name. It was originally established by its

founder and chairman - Sir Richard Branson in the United Kingdom in

1970. Since then, the ‘Virgin Group’ has grown significantly in terms of

its size, geographical reach and the number of industries. The ‘Virgin

Group’has traded under the ‘Virgin’ name since 1970 and continues to do

so. It has built up a considerable amount of reputation and goodwill in the

‘Virgin’ name through its varied activities. Till date, the Group has

created more than 300 branded companies worldwide, employing

approximately 50,000 people in 30 countries. The plaintiff No.1 owns

over 3,000 trademark applications and registrations worldwide for the

marks ‘Virgin’ and ‘Virgin Signature Logo’ in over 150 countries,

including India, spanning across all the 45 classes of goods and services.

The mark ‘Virgin’ was first registered by the plaintiffs on April 11, 1973

in the United Kingdom. Estimated total worldwide turnover figures for the

‘Virgin Group’ for the years 1995 to 2010 have been described in para

2014:DHC:6383

No.12 of the plaint. It is further averred that ‘Virgin’ brand is consistently

recognized for its distinctive nature and reputation spanning across

numerous industry sectors. It has been consistently ranked in the top ten

of most successful, innovative, admired and respected brands by

independent survey companies. Information about these surveys has been

detailed in para No.15 of the plaint.

3.

It is further averred that the present suit concerns the plaintiff

No.1’s statutory and common law rights over their trademark ‘Virgin’ as

well as for the violation of such rights by the defendant by adoption and

use of deceptively identical name and colour combination for its company

‘Virgin Paradise Airlines Training Pvt. Ltd.’. The plaintiffs have given a

comprehensive list of all the registered marks of the plaintiff No.1 in India

in para No.20 of the plaint.

4.

Further case of the plaintiff No.1 is that it came across an

identical and deceptively named company ‘Virgin Paradise Airlines

Training Pvt. Ltd.’in May, 2009. The said name for incorporation has

been used by the defendant with malafide intent. The pronounceable,

prominent and memorable feature of the first word of the name of the

company incorporated by defendant is identical and deceptive to those of

the celebrated trademark ‘Virgin’ of the plaintiff No.1. The similarity of

2014:DHC:6383

the area of service offered by defendant and the services offered by the

plaintiff No.1 i.e. aviation sector make the mark ‘Virgin’ more prone to

confusion and deception to public.

5.

Plaintiff No.1’s further case is that time and again defendant

has been requested to drop the word ‘Virgin’ fr