M/S. Gati Ltd. vs Gati Dance Forum/Gati Forum Trust ...
2014 Latest Caselaw 992 Del

*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                   Order delivered on: February 24, 2014

+                     I.A. No. 13679/2010 in CS(OS) 2087/2010

      M/S GATI LTD                                        ..... Plaintiff
                          Through     Mr.Sandeep Khurana, Adv.

                          versus

      GATI DANCE FORUM/GATI FORUM TRUST & ORS
                                                ..... Defendants
                   Through  Mr.Vaibhav Vutts, Adv. with
                            Mr.Shantanu Sood & Ms.Aamna
                            Hasan, Advs.

      CORAM:
      HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH

MANMOHAN SINGH, J.

1. The present suit has been filed by the plaintiff for permanent injunction, restraining the defendants from infringing upon the registered Trade Mark and copyright, mandatory injunction directing the defendants to stop using the plaintiff's registered trade name (Gati), to promote or/and carry out business and for recovery of damages.

2. The plaintiff, a company having its registered office at Andhra Pradesh, commenced operations of cargo management services in the year 1989 as "Gati Desk to Desk Cargo". It has been stated that now the plaintiff is a full-fledged logistics solutions provider employing more than 3,500 employees and having a turnover of `750 crores. The operations of the plaintiff cover 603 out of 611 districts of India. The plaintiff is in the business of delivering cargo for its customers at various locations and all

across the world. The plaintiff is stated to have pioneered the concept of point-to-point distribution solutions, whereby the plaintiff picks up the packages from its customers door and delivers them to the door of the consignee. The plaintiff also provides complex end-to end integrated logistic solutions like warehousing services, inventory management services, carrying and forwarding services etc. to its clients. it has also been stated that the plaintiff enjoys the trust and goodwill of a very large client base in the Country and abroad.

3. The plaintiff got "GATI" registered as a Trade Mark and Trade Name in the year 2004 and otherwise the plaintiff since the initiation of business in the year 1989 and thereafter since its incorporation in the year 1995 has been using 'GATI' as its trade name.

4. It has been stated that ever since the adoption of the trade name GATI, the plaintiff has spent tremendous sums of money and has put in efforts in publicizing and promoting its brand name and trade mark. It has spent huge sums of money in promotion of the brand name GATI, of which the advertising expenses for the year 2009 are stated to be ` 306.31 lacs.

5. In March 2010, the plaintiff for the first time came to know about the existence of defendants and the fact that the defendants are using a trade name identical to that of the plaintiff. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendants have a website www.gatidance.com wherein the name GATI is prominently displayed in large size thereby causing the general public to reasonably believe and infer that the said website carries the display and services of the plaintiff.

6. It has been submitted that the defendants' use of the trade name GATI is identical and phonetically similar to the trade mark GATI of the plaintiff

and is bound to create confusion and deception amongst the consumers and general public at large. The defendants have adopted the impugned trade mark to encash upon the goodwill and reputation of the plaintiff. the said unauthorized use of the plaintiff's mark is detrimental to the interest of the plaintiff and such user tries to take unfair advantage of the plaintiff's trade mark GATI.

7. On the other hand, it is the case of the defendants that defendant No.1 is a registered non-profit charitable trust and defendant Nos. 2-6 are trustees of defendant No.1 that works to support, facilitate and promote emerging artists working in the field of dance. The defendants work for the promotion of Indian heritage of contemporary and folk dances and to facilitate children and young dances to establish themselves in the field of dance.

8. It is the case of the defendants that the goods and services offered by the defendants are entirely different from those of the plaintiff since plaintiff is offering services in class 39 i.e. transport, packaging and storage of goods, travel arrangement and defendants are offering services under class 41 i.e. education, providing of training, entertainment, sporting and cultural activities. Also while the activities of the plaintiff are commercial in nature, the activities of the defendants are non-commercial in nature.

9. It is stated that the use of "GATI DANCE FORUM" by the defendants would not cause any confusion to an average person with an average intelligence since the services rendered by the parties neither belong to the same class nor allied classes. It is also stated that it is too farfetched to assume that a dance enthusiast would be confused to go to a courier company. Considering the distinct nature of two entities and the relevant segment of public to which the activities of the parties are directed, the

defendants stated that a legal action against them is uncalled for. The channels of conducting activities of the two parties are totally different.

10. The mark GATI is a common Hindi/Sanskrit word and finds mention in Hindi and Sanskrit dictionaries. It had been stated that a simple search at the Indian Trademark Office reveals that there are numerous companies using the mark GATI for various services. Likewise there are companies engaged in different businesses that use GATI as an integral part of their company name.

11. It is not in dispute that both the parties are engaged in different fields of activities. No merchandise goods are involved in the business of the defendant. The chance of confusion and deception in the mind of customers of the both the businesses being different, is nil. GATI is not an invented or coined word. Even the trade channels are different altogether. Considering the nature of the defendant's business and peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, I am not inclined to issue an interim injunction in the present case as no prejudice or injury would be caused to the plaintiff if the defendant may run the dance forum with the prefix GATI which is a common Hindi and Sanskrit word meaning 'movement', which relates and has a direct reference to the business and services provided by the defendant i.e. of dance.

12. Thus, the present application is disposed of with the direction that the defendant shall maintain the true accounts of its business and shall file the details thereof before this Court from the date of adoption of the name GATI till date of the order. The same shall be filed within 4 weeks today. In future, the defendant shall file the statement of accounts of their business "GATI DANCE FORUM" every quarter till the final decision of the suit.

13. The findings arrived at in this order are tentative and shall not prejudice the case of either of the party when the matter is decided after recording the evidence of the parties at the final stage.

14. I.A. No. 13679/2010 is disposed of with these directions.

CS(OS) 2087/2010

Parties are allowed to file list of witnesses within four weeks. The plaintiff shall produce evidence by way of affidavit(s) to be filed within eight weeks from today. List the matter before Joint Registrar on 12 th May, 2014 for direction.

(MANMOHAN SINGH) JUDGE FEBRUARY 24, 2014