MANU/DE/4107/2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI

CS (COMM) 156 of 2019

Decided On: 05.08.2019

Appellants: Tata SIA Airlines Limited Vs. Respondent: Pilot18 Aviation Book Store and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Prathiba M. Singh

JUDGMENT

Prathiba M. Singh, J.

1. The Plaintiff has filed the present suit seeking permanent injunction, restraining infringement of its registered trademarks, dilution, damages, rendition of account, etc. The Plaintiff is a joint venture of TATA Sons Private Limited (hereinafter, 'TATA Sons') and Singapore Airlines Limited (hereinafter, 'SLA'). It operates a full-service airlines under the mark "VISTARA" which undertakes almost 800 weekly flights in India to various destinations. The mark "VISTARA" has been used by the Plaintiff since 2014 for airline services. The use of the mark "VISTARA", as part of the airline services includes usage on the various merchandise, uniforms, name tags, badges and other accessories which are worn by airline staff. The Plaintiff's mark "VISTARA" is registered in India in classes 12, 39, 21, 25, 27 and 28, Singapore, and in various other jurisdictions. The list of the Indian and global registrations has been set out in the plaint.

2. The grievance of the Plaintiff in the present suit is that the Defendant No. 1-M/s. Pilot 18 Aviation Book Store operates an aviation studies portal called www.pilot18.com and Defendant No. 2-Mr. Aanand Keerthy is believed to be the proprietor of Defendant No. 1. The Plaintiff acquired knowledge in February 2019 of sale of "VISTARA" branded products on the website of the Defendants as also on various e-commerce portals such as Amazon and Snapdeal. A perusal of the website print outs, which have been placed on record, show that the Defendants are offering various badges, name tags and other accessories including mugs, baggage tags, etc., bearing the mark "VISTARA" with an identical device mark/logo form.

3. It is the case of the Plaintiff that it got an investigation conducted, in which it was revealed that the Defendants are not only offering these products on their website, but also claim that the Defendants were supplying "VISTARA" branded aviation products to Vistara Airlines. Learned Counsel, upon a query, submits that this is untrue, as the Plaintiff has never sourced any "VISTARA" branded products from the Defendants. Learned Counsel also relies upon the grooming manual of the Plaintiff company which shows that the uniform and other accessories worn by the staff is used and distributed in a controlled manner and is under the control of the Ground Station Head.

4. It is under these circumstances that the present suit came to be filed and prayers for injunction were sought. This Court, vide order dated 26th March, 2019, after considering the pleadings and the documents on record, restrained the Defendants from manufacturing, selling, offering for sale, or dealing in any manner whatsoever with any "VISTARA" branded products, or any other mark or logo which is identical or deceptively similar to the "VISTARA" mark/logo.

5. Submissions have been heard on behalf of both parties. The case of the Defendants is that they have not used the trademark 'Vistara' and that the Plaintiff has concocted a false story. The Defendants have stated in their written statement in paragraph 6 as under:

"6. That the contents of para Nos. 23-28 of the plaint are wrong hence denied. It is submitted that defendants was selling journals and periodicals related to aviation and never sell any products bearing the registered marks VISTARA and the Vistara Star Logo through their physical premises in Delhi as well as through online. Further submitted that defendants never violated Intellectual Property Rights and mislead customers to make profit."

6. A Local Commissioner was also appointed on 26th March, 2019. The Local Commissioner had visited the premises of Defendant No. 1 at E-1085, Lower Ground Floor, Ramphal Chowk Circle, Dwarka Sector-7, Palam Extension, New Delhi-110077 on 2nd April, 2019. The Local Commissioner, in fact, found a large number of products bearing the mark 'Vistara'. He has prepared an inventory of the same. The person present at the shop was one Mr. Vikash Kumar Jha, who claimed to be one of the employees. He informed the Local Commissioner that the proprietor is one Mr. Aanand Keerthy who is out of station. The mobile number of Mr. Aanand Keerthy w........