INTRODUCTION:
The present case[1] pertains to the copyright and trademark infringement of the plaintiffs’ mineral water product sold under the mark “TATA “and “TATA WATER PLUS.” The Plaintiffs discovered that Defendant was selling bottled drinking water in August 2020 using the trademark “TAZA WATER PLUS”; therefore, Plaintiff hired a private investigator to determine the precise nature and scope of Defendant’s infringement and illegal activities. On 26th August 2020, the investigator visited the premises at the address provided in the FSSAI registration of the “TAZA WATER PLUS” product under M/s Taza Water Plus. About 12 to 13 cartons of bottled drinking water were discovered by the investigator. Upon request, the defendant agreed to give the investigator packaged drinking water named “TAZA WATER PLUS” and was more than happy to hand over the product’s packaging with the infringing mark and the same trade dress as the plaintiffs’ goods. Along with the plaint, the investigator submitted a picture of the cartons and the packing used by the defendant. The Plaintiffs, therefore, seek a permanent injunction restraining infringement of registered marks and copyrights, passing off, dilution, and tarnishment of the trademark.
PLAINTIFF:
The registered owner of the trademark “TATA” and various variations/combinations thereof, including the mark “TATA WATER PLUS” in multiple classes, including Class 32 for mineral and aerated waters, etc., and in Class 16 for paper, cardboard, printed matter, etc., is Plaintiff No. 1, Tata Sons Pvt. Ltd. While the usage of the name/trade mark “TATA” by the predecessors-in-business of Plaintiff No. 1 dates back to 1868, the trademark/trade name “TATA” and its many permutations and combinations thereof, have been regularly and continuously utilized since its formation in 1917.
The second plaintiff, Tata Consumer Products Limited, is a subsidiary of the first plaintiff specializing in making branded beverages, including tea, coffee, and water. Nourish Co Beverages Ltd., the third plaintiff, is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the first plaintiff and was created through a partnership between Plaintiff No. 2 and PepsiCo India Holdings Private Limited. A trademark license agreement dated August 26, 2011, permits Plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 to use the mark “TATA WATER PLUS. The product described above is an original and innovative concept in the hydration category, which looks and tastes like regular water but is packed with copper and zinc that the human body can easily absorb.
PROCEEDINGS:
On November 2, 2020, the case was first listed. On that date, the court issued an ad-interim ex-parte injunction order in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant, prohibiting the latter from using the mark “TAZA WATER PLUS” or any other mark or device that might be deceptively similar to the plaintiffs’ “TATA WATER PLUS” product or packaging.
Despite being served with the summons, the defendant failed to appear before this court; therefore, the court proceeded ex-parte against him and upheld the ex-parte injunction order already in effect.
To obtain a summary decision, the plaintiffs subsequently applied I.A. No. 8868/2022 under Order XIII-A of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. The Court exempted the Plaintiffs from providing original papers since Defendant had not replied to the summons. Instead, it permitted the marking of exhibits on photocopies of the documents referenced in the witness’s affidavit.
Court:
The court decreed the suit in favor of the plaintiffs and against the defendant, and damages of Rs.3,00,000 were awarded to the plaintiffs, payable by the defendant. The defendant was directed to hand over all infringing material to the authorized representatives of the plaintiffs for destruction in compliance with extant rules/ regulations.
[1] TATA SONS PRIVATE LTD & ORS. v. SARFARAZ KHAN, CS(COMM) 483/2020 & I.A. 9953/2020, I.A. 9954/2020.
DUCTUS EDGE 