Clear Prima Facie Case Of Infringement: Delhi HC Restrains Vistara Buildtech LLP From Using “Vistara” Mark
The Delhi High Court recently restrained Vistara Buildtech LLP and others acting on their behalf from using the mark “VISTARA”.
This comes after the plaintiff-TATA SIA Airlines Limited, engaged in the commercial aviation industry, had approached the Court aggrieved by the use of the mark VISTARA by one Vistara Buildtech LLP.
“Till the next date of hearing, the defendants and all others acting on their behalf shall stand restrained from using the mark “VISTARA”…”, Justice C. Hari Shankar ordered.
Advocate Kruttika Vijay appeared for the plaintiff.
The Court was informed that due to the infringing nature of the defendants’ marks, the plaintiff issued a cease and desist notice to the defendants calling on the defendants to desist from continuing to use the impugned marks. This was followed by a reminder. However, there was no response.
Thus the plaintiff sought an injunction against the defendants using the impugned marks in any manner.
“A prima facie case of infringement is clearly made out as the plaintiff has, in its favour, several registrations of the word mark VISTARA.”, the Court noted.
The court also noted that the plaintiff has been using the mark VISTARA since at least 2015, and the plaint asserts that the defendants as a partnership firm came into existence in 2022 and are yet to commence building operations under the impugned marks.
Upon an application filed by the plaintiff seeking interlocutory injunctive reliefs, the Court ordered that the defendants and all others acting on their behalf shall stand restrained from using the mark “VISTARA” either as a word mark as part of any device marks, including the impugned marks, in any manner whatsoever and in connection with any goods or services.
“As this order has been passed ex parte, the plaintiff is directed to comply with the requirement of Order XXXIX Rule 3 of the CPC within one week from today.”, the Court added.
Cause Title- TATA SIA Airlines Limited v. VISTARA Buildtech LLP & Anr.