Coaching institute T.I.M.E gets relief from Delhi High Court in trademark infringement suit

The Delhi High Court recently granted an interim injunction in favour of coaching institute Triumphant Institute of Management Education (T.I.M.E), restraining one 'Times Coaching Centre' from using its registered mark for educational services. (Triumphant Institute of Management Education Pvt Ltd v. Times Coaching Centre).Justice Jyoti Singh restrained the defendant institute from using the marks ‘TIMES COACHING CENTRE’ and ‘FUTURE TIMES COACHING CENTRE’ for educational services.The Court also held that the acronym ‘T.I.M.E.’ is a dominant and essential feature of the plaintiff’s trademarks."Plaintiff (T.I.M.E) is thus prima facie correct in its submission that because of the commonality in the services of the respective parties, the public at large and more particularly, the students would get confused with the origin of services offered by the Defendant and mistake the same to be that of the Plaintiff, on account of the deceptive similarity in the acronym T.I.M.E. and TIMES in the Defendant’s trademarks," the order stated.Further, the contempt application filed by T.I.M.E against the defendant for not complying with the Court's earlier injunction was not entertained by the Court."Since notice of contempt and punishment has far reaching consequences, these powers should be invoked only when a clear case of wilful disobedience of Court’s order is made out," the Court reasoned while dismissing the same..T.I.M.E had filed a suit alleging that the defendant’s usage of the word ‘TIMES’ as part of its trade name for educational services amounted to infringement and passing off.The plaintiff company claimed that it was the renowned owner of a comprehensive chain of coaching Institutes offering premium education and training for various national and state-level examinations including CAT, GATE, CLAT, IIT-JEE and GMAT."The institutes are run under the trademark and style T.I.M.E., which is an acronym derived from the name of the Company, i.e., TRIUMPHANT INSTITUTE OF MANAGEMENT EDUCATION," the plaintiffs had submitted..On a comparison of ‘T.I.M.E.’ and ‘TIMES’, the Court held that the two are phonetically identical and deceptively similar.The Court further held that the use of the word ‘TIMES’ by the defendant was dishonest and with a view to misrepresent to the general public that it had an association or connection with that of the plaintiff."...the use of the word ‘TIMES’ by the Defendant for which it has no plausible explanation, is dishonest and only with a view to misrepresent to the general public that Defendant’s Institute has an association or a connection with Plaintiff’s Institute or is a branch thereof and is calculated to injure its goodwill and reputation," the Court said.While rejecting the defendant's argument that the word ‘TIMES’ is a word used in common parlance or is common to trade, the Court held that ‘T.I.M.E.’ is an acronym of the plaintiff’s company’s name, wholly connected with the business of the plaintiff, and therefore, entitled to protection in law. Additionally, the Court stated that the very fact that the defendant chose to adopt the word 'TIMES' as a part of its trademark, without disclosing a single reason as to why it chose only the word TIMES for similar educational and training programmes, was itself indicative of its intent to confuse the consumers and encash on the plaintiff’s reputation. However, the Court made it clear that defendant is at liberty to run its institute under any other trademark including 'FUTURE COACHING CENTRE', albeit sans the usage of the word ‘TIMES’.The petition was disposed of with costs of ₹20,000 payable by the defendant to the Delhi High Court Bar Clerk's Association within two weeks from the date of the order..The plaintiff was represented by Advocates J Sai Deepak and Bitika Sharma, Luv Virmani and Aadya Chawla of Singh & Singh Law Firm LLP. Advocates Rajeshwari H and Nupur Goswami appeared for the defendants..[Read order]

Coaching institute T.I.M.E gets relief from Delhi High Court in trademark infringement suit

Related Stories