The High Court of Delhi at New Delhi delivered a significant judgement in case of The Ritz Hotel Limited v. M S Hotel Ritz, reaffirming the strength of trademarks in the Indian law under the Intellectual Property Rights. Justice Amit Bansal provided valuable insights regarding Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 and how "well-known" trademarks will be granted protection under Intellectual Property Rights.
Background
The Ritz Hotel Limited(Plaintiff), owns the famous "The
Ritz Paris", which was established in Paris in the year 1898.
Whilst the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company, L.L.C., owns the
trademarks "RITZ-CARLTON", "THE RITZ-CARLTON"
and several other device marks in their name. These marks have
become synonymous with the brand itself.
The Plaintiff issued an interim injunction application against the
defendants for infringing and passing off their marks. The
plaintiffs claimed that the defendants were infringing the words
"RITZ" on their hotel services, misleading the customers
and causing damage to the reputation of the plaintiff and his
business.
Plaintiff's Contentions
The plaintiff claimed that its marks "RITZ" and
"RITZ-CARLTON" are widely recognized and respected in
India as well as globally. They highlighted their extensive
history, awards and accolades and described how they have gained
recognition in the market. In and around November 2023, the
plaintiffs came across certain websites which predominantly
displayed the infringing "RITZ" marks in relation to
the
defendants hotel services. On a thorough inquiry, the plaintiffs
discovered that the defendants were falsely advertising the
infringing "RITZ" marks, which were receiving significant
negative review on the internet. This was directly harming the
reputation of the plaintiffs.
Defendant's Contentions
The defendant's submitted that they had ceased to use the impugned marks "RITZ", on websites and the email addresses associated with the infringing marks. Subsequently, the defendant suggested utilizing revised marks such as "RITIZ" or "RITS", which was declined due to the marks being considered deceptively similar to the impugned marks.
Proceedings
After being served in January, the defendants initially agreed
to cease to use the impugned marks but later in March, it was found
that they were still using the impugned marks on their stationery,
menu card and invoices. The long duration for which the RITZ and
RITZ-CARLTON marks had been in use by the plaintiffs, wide
geographical area of their use, their knowledge among the general
public and their goodwill and reputation due to the extensive
promotion, publicity and extensive revenue generated by the
plaintiffs, in India as well as other countries, the RITZ and RITZ
CARLTON marks have achieved the status of well-known
trademarks.
The Court examined the evidence and declared that the
plaintiff's mark had achieved the status of
"well-known" marks under Section 2(1)(zg) and Section
11(7) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 in respect of hotels and other
related services in the hospitality industry. The court granted a
permanent injunction restraining the defendants from using the
infringing marks. The defendants were also directed to discontinue
their websites.
Uncontested Nature of Proceedings
Notably, the case was resolved without substantial contest from the defendant, who did not object to the plaintiff's claims. This demonstrates that a trademark can be declared well-known by the court even in uncontested proceedings, provided that the statutory criteria are met.
Conclusion
This case is more than just a win for The Ritz Hotel Limited,
it's a strong reminder of the power and importance of brand
identity. By recognising "RITZ" as a well-known
trademark, the Delhi High Court has sent a clear message, names
that carry years of reputation, recognition, and trust cannot be
misused or imitated, even if the imitation seems subtle.
What makes this decision especially interesting is that it came
through uncontested proceedings. The defendants didn't fight
the claim, yet the court still took the time to carefully examine
the evidence and uphold the law. That shows how seriously the
judiciary takes brand protection, even in the absence of a
full-fledged legal battle.
For businesses, especially in sectors like hospitality, fashion, or
luxury, this is a valuable lesson. A name isn't just a label,
it's an asset built over time. Using someone else's brand,
even unintentionally, can have serious legal consequences. And for
brand owners, this judgement is a sign that Indian courts are
willing to stand behind them, protecting the goodwill they've
worked hard to earn. In a world where brand reputation can be won
or lost with a single click, this decision is both timely and
reassuring.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
