New Delhi: Noting that Ratan Tata “is a well-known personal name or mark”, which needs to be protected from unauthorised use by a third party, the Delhi High Court has barred a journalist from organising an award show in the late tycoon’s name.
Acting on a petition filed by the Sir Ratan Tata Trust, a bench of Justice Mini Pushkarna ruled Friday that Rajat Srivastava, who appeared to be a journalist and the founder of Delhi Today Group, “shall not use the registered trademarks TATA or TATA Trust and the name and photograph of late Mr. Ratan Tata, for any purpose whatsoever, including, conferring any awards”.
A “well-known trademark”, in relation to any goods or services, means a mark which has become widely known to the general public, enjoys a relatively high reputation and is given wider protection than other ordinary trademarks.
Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trademarks Act defines a well-known trademark as one that is known to a significant section of the public in India. The degree of its recognition depends on factors like the volume of its sales and its market share, among others.
Also Read: Death penalty in Sharon Raj murder case, life term to RG Kar rape-murder convict? Here’s why
The case
In its February 7 ruling, the Delhi HC acted on a plea filed by the Sir Ratan Tata Trust seeking a permanent injunction restraining the infringement of its registered and well-known trademark.
A trademark is a symbol, design, word, or phrase used to identify a business’s goods or services. Once registered, a trademark owner can claim exclusive rights over the use of the trademark. These rights remain valid for 10 years. Section 25 of the Trademarks Act says that the trademark—registered at the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs, and Trademarks—can also be renewed periodically.
Usually, when a trademark is infringed, or used in an unauthorised manner, courts can step in to provide relief by restraining the use of another’s trademark through ad interim (temporary) or permanent injunctions. They can also order damages in favour of the one whose registered trademark has been infringed.
In its plea, the Trust said that theirs was a philanthropic organisation founded in the year 1919, and they were the registered proprietor of the trademark, “Tata Trusts”. The larger Tata Group of Companies, was also made party to this case as it represents the interests of all Tata companies , along with their image and reputation.
Flagging “brazen disregard” by the defendants for their proprietary rights and concerns, despite being notified, the plea said that Srivastava had chosen to advertise and publicise an unauthorised event and award, “falsely claiming” support and association with the Tata Trusts, and its former chairman, the late Ratan N. Tata.
The Tata Group, as a responsible corporate citizen and a large philanthropic organisation, is seeking to protect against the defendant’s misuse of the goodwill associated with its well-known name, brand, logo and reputation of its leaders, to mislead the public, the plea said. “The name ‘Tata’ is respected in India for more than 150 years, for adhering to strong values and business ethics.”
The issue came to light sometime in the last week of January, the plea said, adding that the plaintiffs were claiming to host an event by the name, ‘Ratan Tata National Icon Award 2025’ on 10 February in New Delhi.
What court said
In its 25-page ruling, the court said that Ratan Tata can modestly be described as India’s leading philanthropic industrialist, who was “a pioneer in the field of business and entrepreneurship”.
It also noted Tata’s “monumental contributions” to the field of Indian industry and philanthropy, like him being honoured with Padma Bhushan in 2000 and with India’s second highest civilian award Padma Vibushan in 2008.
Calling this a “clear case of fraud” where the organisers were “blatantly misusing” the registered trademarks, the court found that they were misusing Tata’s name to defraud the public into paying nomination fees, which people otherwise wouldn’t have parted with, had it not been for misuse of the trademarks.
As his name cannot be used by third-parties without consent or authorisation, the court noted that in this case, the organisers had “intentionally put up posts which wrongly claim association” with Tata, and misused his name, by unauthorizedly using registered marks such as “TATA, TATA TRUSTS”, the logo and his photograph to “induce, cheat and mislead gullible members of public by promising them association with/ endorsement from the plaintiffs, and soliciting and collecting money as nomination fee.”
“This is, prima facie, a bad faith and egregious infringement of plaintiffs‟ statutory and legal rights, in order to have a free ride on the tremendous goodwill of the plaintiffs and that of Late Mr. Ratan Tata, with a view to benefitting from and gaining publicity out of Late Mr. Tata‟s distinct and widely regarded personality,” the HC said, restraining the award-organisers from using the said mark.
(Edited by Tony Rai)
Also Read: Elgar Parishad case: Why Rona Wilson & Sudhir Dhawale were granted bail after 6 yrs in jail