Chennai: Automobile major Maruti Udyog Limited has won a legal battle against a Gujarat-based piston producing company, which sought to corner the popular trademark, ‘Maruti’. Dismissing an appeal by Maruti Piston Private Limited, Kalol, Gujarat, the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) said, “no one is entitled to snatch the goodwill and reputation obtained by a company”. The bench comprising its chairman, Justice K.N. Basha and Technical Member (Trade Marks), Sanjeev Kumar Chaswal said it is needless to say that the brand name Maruti had obtained world-wide reputation in four wheelers and any attempt to use the name for two wheelers or three wheelers will certainly affect the reputation of Maruti.
In the appeal, Maruti Piston submitted that it was manufacturing and marketing Pistons Auto Parts since 1991. It had adopted and coined the mark “Maruti” from its trade name Maruti Pistons (P) Limited. The company proposed to use it only for pistons used for two-wheelers or three-wheelers and not for four-wheelers. The trademark was published in Trademark Journal. Challenging this, Maruti Udyog opposed the move stating that it was a reputed manufacturer of four-wheelers and parts thereof under the mark ‘MARUTI’ and ‘Wing’ device for several years. The company also said it was using the mark since 1972 and 1983 and continues to use it till today. It also said Maruti Pistons’ trademark was identical to its trade mark.
The Assistant Registrar, Trade Mark Registry Branch, Ahmedabad, rejecting the application of Maruti Piston in an order dated June 6, 2012. Challenging this, the Gujarat-based company filed an appeal before IPAB. Opposing this, counsel for Maruti Udyog contended that there was no infirmity or illegality in the order passed by the Trademark Registry. Maruti Piston had not established distinctiveness of its product. Hence, it was not entitled to seek registration of the trademark Maruti.
Dismissing the appeal, the bench said Maruti Udyog was established in 1972 and its four-wheelers released for public in 1984. The applicant’s trademark was phonetically and visually similar that of ‘Maruti’. This would certainly cause confusion in the mind of the public who are the consumers and users of Maruti cars.
