Ratan Tata’s Name: A Distinguished Identity The Delhi High Court clarified that the name of renowned industrialist Ratan Tata is not only a personal name but also a prestigious trademark, and its unauthorized use is illegal.
Justice Mini Pushkarna delivered this verdict in a lawsuit filed by the Ratan Tata Trust in favor of Ratan Tata. The case was against journalist Dr. Rajat Srivastava, who used Ratan Tata's name and image for an event titled "The Ratan Tata National Icon Award 2024."
What did the Court say?
"TATA has already been recognized as a prestigious trademark. Furthermore, the late Ratan Tata is a well-known personality, and his name cannot be used without permission." – Delhi High Court
Background of the Case
Ratan Tata Trust and the Tata Group claimed that Dr. Srivastava organized the event by charging a nomination fee and misleading people into believing that it was endorsed by the Tata Group.
The lawsuit argued that it was a clear case of fraud, where the prestigious name of the Tata brand was misused to deceive the public.
Ratan Tata’s Name as a Prestigious Brand: The court acknowledged that the name "Ratan Tata" holds a distinct identity, which must be protected from unauthorized use.
Malicious Intent: The court found that the accused attempted to exploit the Tata brand's name and reputation with a malicious intent.
Illegal Use of Name and Trademark: The court clarified that the use of the Tata Group and Tata Trust names, trademarks, and logos without permission is illegal.
"This case is not only about trademark infringement but also about misleading the public and fraud." – Delhi High Court
The court instructed Dr. Rajat Srivastava to:
Refrain from using the "TATA" and "TATA TRUST" names and logos.
Not use Ratan Tata's name and image for any commercial purpose.
Submit an affidavit confirming that he will not engage in such activities in the future.
his decision strengthens the legal protection of prestigious business names and personalities in India. It makes it clear that unauthorized use of any famous person’s name or brand is illegal and may lead to legal action.
This judgment sets an important precedent for the protection of corporate ethics and intellectual property rights.