LAWS(DLH)-2019-7-295

TATA SONS LTD Vs. PRAKASH YADAV

Decided On July 15, 2019
TATA SONS LTD Appellant
V/S
Prakash Yadav Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present suit is for permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered trademarks, passing off, dilution and tarnishment of trademarks, damages, rendition of accounts, delivery up, etc. The suit has been filed by M/s Tata Sons Limited, which is now known as M/s Tata Sons Private Limited. The Plaintiff was established in 1917 and is the promoter and principal investment holding company of the House of TATA, which had a turnover of more than 100 billion US dollars in 2013-14. Tata is one of the most well-known brands of India and is engaged in the business of a wide range of goods and services including industrial core sectors, pioneering textiles, iron & steel, power, chemicals, hotels and automobile industries in India. It has also expanded into a large number of IT services including computer software, electronics, as also financial services. The trademark TATA is registered in favour of the Plaintiff in a large number of classes including in Class 5.

(2.) Defendant No. 2, M/s Vardhman Chemicals, is owned by Mr. Prakash Yadav, the Defendant No. 1. He operates various shops under the name of Vardhman Chemicals. The said M/s Vardhman Chemicals used to distribute its products through M/s Tonic House - Defendant No.4. The grievance of the Plaintiff is that the Defendants started using the trademark TATAZYME and TATA GOLD for various agricultural products. An investigator had been deputed to investigate the activities of the Defendants and had submitted a report from which it is clear that the Defendants were using the marks TATA and TATA GOLD.

(3.) The Plaintiff had issued notice dated 24th August, 2009 to the Defendants, which was replied to vide letter dated 3rd September, 2009. Vide the said letter, Defendant No. 1 on his behalf and on behalf of Defendant No. 2 gave an undertaking that they would not use the mark TATAZYME in respect of its bio-products and that they would also change the packaging of the product. The relevant portion of the said letter reads as under: