Delhi High Court Restrains Real Estate Company From Unauthorisedly Using Taj's Vivanta Trademark

The Delhi High Court has restrained a real estate company offering luxury flats and accommodations from unauthorisedly using “Vivanta” mark in a trademark infringement suit filed by The Indian Hotels Company which owns hospitality brand 'Taj'.

Justice Sanjeev Narula issued summons in the suit filed against Shivgyan Developers Private Limited alleging that the company was using “SHIVGYAN VIVANTA” name for one of its housing projects.

The Indian Hotels Company sued the company alleging that the name used by it for its housing project was deceptively similar to its registered trademark “VIVANTA.”

“…till the next date of hearing, Defendant and/or anyone acting on their behalf, are restrained from unauthorizedly using the Plaintiff's registered trademark “VIVANTA” or any other identical or deceptively similar mark, in any manner or form (both online and offline), thereby amounting to infringement and/or passing off,” the court said.

It observed that the defendant real estate company consciously used “Vivanta” trademark to mislead consumers and create a false association between the two.

“Given the identical nature of the marks and the overlapping target audience for both parties, such actions have the potential to cause significant harm to the Plaintiff's brand and business interests,” the court said.

Furthermore, the court observed that considering the goodwill, reputation, and long-standing presence of the Indian Hotels Company's brand and trademark “VIVANTA,” the adoption of an identical mark for similar services related to luxury accommodation by the defendant posed a significant risk of confusing or deceiving consumers.

“The Plaintiff provides hotel and restaurant services under the “VIVANTA” brand, while the Defendant offers real estate projects involving luxury accommodation under the same mark,” the court said.

It added given the overlapping nature of the services, along with the shared marketing channels, there was substantial potential for the marks to be associated with each other.

“This association could lead consumers to mistakenly believe that the Defendant's services or project is related to or endorsed by the Plaintiff, thereby causing irreparable harm to the Plaintiff's business interests and diluting the distinctive character of their trademark,” the court said.

Justice Narula concluded that similarities of the services and the identical nature of the marks clearly indicated the likelihood of passing off and trademark infringement, warranting protective measures at the interlocutory stage.

Counsel for Plaintiff: Mr. Pravin Anand, Mr. Achuthan Sreekumar, Mr. Rohil Bansal and Ms. Swastik Bisarya, Advocates

Title: THE INDIAN HOTELS COMPANY LIMITED v. SHIVGYAN DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Del) 567

Click here to read order