The Plaintiff filed the present suit inter alia seeking a decree of permanent injunction restraining the Defendants from directly or indirectly dealing in the business of providing transport; packaging and storage of goods; travel arrangement, packaging / moving services under the domain name www.tatapackers.com and/or using any trademark/ description/name/device bearing the trademark TATA or any other mark which is deceptively similar to the Plaintiff’s trademark TATA. [The judgment is available here]
It is contended that the Plaintiff has been continuously using the trademark and trade name TATA since its inception in 1917. The Defendant is neither a related entity of TATA group nor given the right to use TATA. The Defendants are engaged in the business of providing transport; packaging and storage of goods; travel arrangement, packaging / moving services under the name and style TATA PACKERS AND MOVERS. They were also operating via their website www.tatapackers.com.
The Court examined printouts from the website of the Trade Marks Registry and noted that the Plaintiff is the registered proprietor of the mark TATA in various classes Including Class 39 (Transport; Packaging and storage of goods; travel arrangement). The Court observed that the mark TATA has been used by the Plaintiff for a long period of time and it enjoys reputation and goodwill and has acquired the status of a “well-known” mark. Considering the fact situation, the Court came to the conclusion that the “Defendants are carrying on their business in the same field as that of the Plaintiff and are infringing the registered mark of the Plaintiff, TATA, by adopting a deceptively similar trade name TATA PACKERS AND MOVERS and website www.tatapackers.com.” Accordingly, the suit was decreed in favour of the Plaintiff.