Delhi High Court grants relief to German body in case against Indian entity over ‘Max Mueller’ trademark

The Delhi High Court recently granted interim relief to German cultural organisation Goethe-Institut in a trademark case filed by it against an Indian entity for using the "Max Mueller" mark while offering German language courses. .The Goethe-Institut is a German-origin entity that offers German language courses in various countries. In India, these services are offered through centres named Max Mueller Bhavan.On May 6, Justice Mini Pushkarna passed an interim order restraining a private Indian entity from using “Max Mueller” and “Max Mueller Institute" or similar names for German language training services.The Court ruled that, prima facie, the Goethe Institut had clearly established prior use, goodwill and public recognition of its mark “Max Mueller Bhavan,” which distinguishes its German language teaching services across India.“Interim injunction is granted thereby restraining the defendants from using the impugned marks, MAX MUELLER/ MAX MUELLER INSTITUTE during the pendency of the present suit," the Court ordered..The Court also found that, prima facie, the defendants, Abhishek Yadav and others, had adopted and used the "Max Mueller Institute" mark with a malafide intention to pass off their services as those of the plaintiff (Goethe-Institut/ Max Mueller Bhavan)..The Goethe-Institut, an entity from the Federal Republic of Germany, commenced operations in India in 1957 by establishing its first centre in Kolkata under the name Max Mueller Bhavan. Today, six such institutes operate across India under the same name. “The plaintiff has filed several documents before this Court to show use of MAX MUELLER BHAVAN by the plaintiff, since the year 1957. On the other hand, the defendants have adopted the impugned mark only in the year 2018," the Court noted in its May 6 ruling.The Court also cited PAN cards, bank accounts, official certificates and media articles to conclude that “MAX MUELLER BHAVAN" is popularly and commonly referred to distinguish the services of the Goethe-Institut from those of others..The defendants claimed that their use of “Max Mueller Institute” since 2018 was bona fide, inspired by the German Indologist Max Müller, and not intended to mislead. They contended that the plaintiff was known only as “Goethe-Institut” and that “Max Mueller Bhavan” was merely a building name.These arguments were rejected by the Court, which noted:“It cannot be countenanced that a building has been issued a PAN Card or has bank accounts in various banks.”.The Court also held that the defendants’ earlier identity as “Achievers Point” and the later switch to “Max Mueller” supported the finding of dishonest adoption.“This clearly shows the bad faith adoption by the defendants," the Court said. .Emphasizing the need to avoid confusion in the education sector, Justice Pushkarna added,“In the area of education, any chance of confusion should be completely avoided. The use of identical names for two institutions imparting education, would result in enormous confusion, resulting in damaging effect.”It was also noted that the defendants’ websites appeared alongside the plaintiff’s official links in search results, further deepening potential public confusion.The Court placed significant reliance on the doctrine of prior use under Section 34 of the Trade Marks Act.“Rights of prior user are recognised as superior than that of the registration and even the registered proprietor cannot disturb/interfere with the rights of prior user," the Court said. .The matter will be listed next before the roster bench on May 13..Goethe-Institut was represented by Senior Advocate Chander M Lall with Advocates Karan Bajaj, Suman Jyoti Khaitan, Vikas Kumar and Vihaan Kumar..The defendants was represented by Advocates Vikas Khera, Sneha Sethia and Yash Sharma..[Read Judgment]