Travel firm Vistara Voyages has questioned the use of the word “Vistara” as brand name for the airline, which is a joint venture between Tata and Singapore Airlines
The dispute between over Tata SIA Airlines and Bengaluru-based travel firm Vistara Voyages (India) over the use of the word Vistara reached the Supreme Court on Friday.
The travel firm has questioned the use of the word, “Vistara,” as brand name for the airlines, which is a joint venture between Tata and Singapore Airlines .
A bench headed by Justice AR Dave adjourned the matter till March 4 after the parties informed that they were “trying to settle the dispute.”
Vistara Voyages has challenged the Karnataka High Court’s judgement that had directed a city civil and sessions court to return a suit filed by the travel agency seeking to restrain the airline from using the word, “Vistara,” as brand name. The travel firm had claimed that it was using the mark since 2008 for its travel and travel-related business purposes and had pointed out that Tata SIA was incorporated only in November 2013. Besides, Vistara Voyages also claimed that its application for registration of “Vistara” as its trademark has been pending before the authorities.
Vistara Voyages further contended that the trade marks had been widely advertised and extensively used by the company in the travel and travel related market since 2008 and same was advertised through its website and as such the trade marks had been widely publicised locally in India and internationally for both retail and corporate clients.
However, the the HC had rejected its plea saying that the suit cannot be initiated in Bengaluru courts as Vistara Voyages did not hold a registered trade mark right over “Vistara” and there was no evidence to show that “Air Vistara” was operating or had branch office in Bengaluru, from where Vistara Voyages, a travel agency, has been operating.
Tata SIA Airlines had questioned the December 18, 2014 order of 18th Additional City Civil and Sessions Court refusing to return the plea for want of jurisdiction.