Ratan Tata is a known figure, his trademark must be protected: Delhi High Court
Ratan Tata is a well-known figure and his trademark deserves to be protected, the Delhi High Court has ruled.
The Delhi high court ruled last week that late industrialist Ratan Tata, who was at the helm of Tata Group companies for decades, is a well-known figure and his trademark must be protected.
The court was hearing a petition filed by Tata Group and Sir Ratan Tata Trust and observed that it is “manifest that the name of late Shri Ratan Tata is a well-known personal name/mark, which needs to be protected from any unauthorised use by any third party”.
Also read: Ratan Tata’s will unveils mystery beneficiary, ₹500 crore surprise shocks many: Report
Tata Group and the trust have also sought damages worth over ₹2 crore for allegedly causing harm to their reputation and goodwill. According to the lawsuit, Srivastava chose to continue advertising and publishing an unauthorised event and award despite being notified.
The court further restrained a journalist from using the name “Ratan Tata National Icon Award” or the trademarks “Tata” and “Tata Trusts” for an event being organised by him.
What did the court say?
{{/usCountry}}What did the court say?
{{/usCountry}}Justice Mini Pushkarna passed the order as media outlet Delhi Today Group's Founder Rajat Srivastava agreed not to use Ratan Tata's name. The High Court also ordered Srivastava to give an undertaking towards the same.
{{/usCountry}}Justice Mini Pushkarna passed the order as media outlet Delhi Today Group's Founder Rajat Srivastava agreed not to use Ratan Tata's name. The High Court also ordered Srivastava to give an undertaking towards the same.
{{/usCountry}}It added that Srivastava's actions show he intentionally put up posts which wrongly claimed association with Ratan Tata and misuse his name by unauthorisedly using his registered marks.
{{/usCountry}}It added that Srivastava's actions show he intentionally put up posts which wrongly claimed association with Ratan Tata and misuse his name by unauthorisedly using his registered marks.
{{/usCountry}}Also read: Who is Mohini Mohan Dutta, man who received ₹500 crore in Ratan Tata's will?
{{/usCountry}}Also read: Who is Mohini Mohan Dutta, man who received ₹500 crore in Ratan Tata's will?
{{/usCountry}}Justice Pushkarna noted that the journalist's actions were in bad faith and were an "egregious infringement of plaintiffs' statutory and legal rights, to have a free ride on the tremendous goodwill of the plaintiffs and that of the late Ratan Tata, to benefit from and gain publicity out of the late Mr Tata’s distinct and widely regarded personality and public persona”.
{{/usCountry}}Justice Pushkarna noted that the journalist's actions were in bad faith and were an "egregious infringement of plaintiffs' statutory and legal rights, to have a free ride on the tremendous goodwill of the plaintiffs and that of the late Ratan Tata, to benefit from and gain publicity out of the late Mr Tata’s distinct and widely regarded personality and public persona”.
{{/usCountry}}The court also noted that Srivastava falsely claimed support from an association with Tata Trusts and its former chairman.
