The Delhi High Court recently comprising of a bench of Justice Navin Chawla awarded ₹20 lakh in damages to Tata Sia Airlines in its trademark infringement suit against a Chinese company that was selling products bearing the 'Vistara' trademark through e-commerce website AliExpress. (Tata Sia Airlines Ltd v. Shenzhen Coloursplendour Gift Co Ltd & Anr)
Facts of the case
The present suit was filed seeking inter alia a decree of permanent injunction restraining the defendant, their associated companies, subsidiaries, directors, wholesalers, distributors, partners or proprietors, as the case may be, its officers, servant and agents from advertising, directly or indirectly offering any goods or services, using or registering corporate names, domain names, or listings on social media platforms as also e-commerce websites which bear the plaintiff‟s registered trade marks „VISTARA’ and/or (hereinafter referred to as the „VISTARA Marks’) along with relief against passing off, dilution, tarnishment and unfair competition.
Vistara Airlines contended in its trademark infringement suit that Chinese e-commerce platform AliExpress is selling identical keychains and baggage tags, in the same aubergine and gold colour combination. The plaintiff issues baggage tags to its crew members which bear the plaintiff‟s ‘VISTARA Marks’. It was alleged that despite the e-commerce platform being based mostly in China, the website contained several listings by the defendant of infringing baggage tags and keychains bearing the ‘VISTARA Marks’ in the aubergine and gold colour-combination without the authorisation of the plaintiff which were eligible for shipping to India.
Courts observation and order
The High Court observed that the use of the “VISTARA Marks” not only amounted to infringement and passing off but would cause dilution of the mark. It was also likely to cause deception and confusion in the mind of the unwary consumer.
The court also added that Vistara’s apprehension of national as also international security concerns at airports by mala fide usage of the baggage tags and keychains being offered for sale by the defendant seller prima facie was valid in nature. Considering the fact that Vistara was the registered proprietor of the ‘VISTARA Marks’ and there was no appearance for the defendant seller, the Court opined that the seller had no justification for the adoption of an identical trade mark for sale of the goods in question. It said “Airports are an incredibly critical junction of not only travel but also of trade and commerce; any lapse in security, especially by permitting the sale of vagrantly-infringing goods, would be turning a blind eye to obvious wrongdoings of the defendant” .
The bench took note of the fact that in September 2020, an ex-parte ad-interim injunction was granted in Vistara's favour restraining the defendant seller from manufacturing or selling baggage tags or keychains under the impugned trade mark. The same was made absolute vide order dated December 18, 2020 until final disposal.
The Court taking note of the same remarked, "in cases where the defendant, in spite of being served with an injunction order, chooses not to contest the suit, the same fortifies that it is indulging in activities complained of by the plaintiff in the plaint."
Consequently the court order stated “Keeping in view the above as also the object and mandate of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015; the Delhi High Court (Original Side) Rules, 2018; and the Delhi High Court Intellectual Property Division Rules, 2022, the plaintiff is held entitled to damages and costs quantified at Rs. 20 Lakh (Rupees Twenty Lakh only).”
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
