[Trademark infringement] Madras High Court rules in favour of Bharat Matrimony

The Madras High Court recently ruled in in favour of Matrimony.com Limited, the proprietor of bharatmatrimony.com (Bharat Matrimony/ plaintiff) in a trademark infringement suit filed against Silicon Valley Infomedia Private Limited (defendant). (M/s.Matrimony.com Limited v. Silicon Valley Infomedia Private Limited).The Court has granted a permanent injunction to ensure that the trademark, bharatmatrimony.com is not infringed upon in any way by the defendant..“The defendant has adopted the domain name www.bharatmatrimony.org, which is squarely prohibited under Section 29 of the Trademark Act as infringement. Under Section 29(3), if the identical mark used for identical service, the Court shall presume the infringement. Here it is a case where the identical mark for identical service is adopted by the defendant and no justification has come forward from the defendant, despite affording opportunity. Therefore, the suit is allowed in respect of the injunction relief sought against infringement”, the Court said..The judgement was delivered by Justice Dr G Jayachandran who opined that the defendant was taking unfair advantage of the goodwill that Bharat Matrimony enjoyed in the field of establishing marriage alliances online..The plaintiff told the Court that the defendant’s company www.siliconinfo.com was deceptively using the plaintiff’s trademark to redirect internet traffic to the defendant’s website. In this regard, the Court was told that the defendant had been using the domain name www.bharatmatrimony.org..The Court was further informed that the plaintiff had been in the business of arranging matrimonial alliances online since 1997, in the name and style of www.bharatmatrimony.com and that ‘Bharatmatrimony’ was registered with the trademark registry since 2006. .The plaintiff submitted that it had tremendous goodwill and wide acceptance for their online matchmaking services. By using a similar style and trademark, the defendant had been deceiving potential clients to register on their website instead of the original www.bharatmatrimony.com, the plaintiff contended..The Court noted that the defendant had neither replied to the plaintiff's cease and desist notice, nor did they file written submissions before the Court, eventually forfeiting the right to do so..The defendant had entered appearance through two advocates, but refused to conduct a cross-examination on the plaintiff’s witnesses, it was observed..The Court further commented that the defendant had accepted the documents produced to prove that the plaintiff is the prior user of the trademark for Bharatmatrimony and that the same has been duly registered..The Court, therefore, granted relief to the plaintiff to the extent of allowing a permanent injunction restraining the defendant from using similar trademarks or domain name, or redirecting traffic to their website via Google by using deceptive metatags. The defendant was also directed to also submit all materials with it that bore the plaintiff’s trademark (bharatmatrimony) to the plaintiff..However, citing lack of evidence to show that the defendant had gained any profit from the use of the plaintiff’s trademark, the Court did not award any damages to the plaintiff..Advocate Arun C Mohan appeared for the plaintiff..[Read Judgment].The Bharat Matrimony case: Is Google’s AdWords Policy legal?