The Delhi High Court dismissed the application by Yatra Online Limited seeking an interim injunction against Mach Conferences and Events from using the marks “BookMyYatra” and “BookMyYatra.com,” allowing the defendant to use the marks and associated domain.
Yatra Online Limited filed the suit alleging trademark infringement, passing off, misrepresentation, dilution, and unfair competition. Yatra claimed exclusive rights in its trademarks incorporating “Yatra” and “Yatra.com,” through longstanding registration and use since 2006. It sought to restrain Mach Conferences from using deceptively similar marks for identical travel-related services, specifically “BookMyYatra” and “BookMyYatra.com,” as well as the associated domain name. The suit was filed following an ex-parte ad-interim injunction granted in December 2024, citing Sections relevant to trademark infringement and passing off.
After discovering the defendant’s plans to launch the portal “BookMyYatra,” and the defendant’s trademark applications in Classes 9, 39, and 42, Yatra alleged that these marks caused consumer confusion due to similarity. Yatra contended that the defendant had adopted the marks in bad faith, intending to ride on the goodwill associated with Yatra’s brand and marks, which it claimed had acquired secondary meaning and distinctiveness in India’s travel industry.
The plaintiff emphasized its market leadership, high turnover, promotional efforts, and widespread consumer recognition of “Yatra” marks. It argued disclaimers on its device marks do not diminish acquired common law rights. The defendant argued “Yatra” is a generic Hindi word for travel used widely by many, making exclusivity impossible. The defendant also highlighted several inactive domains held by the plaintiff as “squatting.”
The Bench comprising Justice Tejas Karia held that the plaintiff’s disclaimer of exclusive rights on the word “Yatra” in Class 39 trademark registrations effectively bars monopolistic claims. The Court noted that the plaintiff had failed to demonstrate that “Yatra” had lost its generic meaning or that it had acquired a secondary meaning uniquely identifying Plaintiff’s services.
The “BookMyYatra” marks, considered in entirety, are distinct from Plaintiff’s marks due to the common and generic prefix “BookMy,” which does not confer distinctiveness on “Yatra” alone. The Court referred to precedents confirming that generic and descriptive words cannot be monopolized and that domain suffixes like “.com” lack protectable distinctiveness. The Court further observed that Plaintiff had not applied for or obtained goodwill recognition of “Yatra” as a well-known trademark.
The Court dismissed Yatra’s injunction application, vacated the ex-parte interim injunction, and ruled that no prima facie case of infringement or passing off had been made out against Mach Conferences. It permitted Mach Conferences to continue using “BookMyYatra” and operate the www.bookmyyatra.com website.
For the Plaintiff: Mr. Pravin Anand, Ms. Jaya Negi & Ms. Yashi Agarwal, Advocates.
For the Defendant: Mr. Saurabh Prakash, Mr. Utsav Jain & Mr. Anant Aditya Patro, Advocates.