Summary
In the case of Yatra Online Limited v. Mach Conferences and Events Limited, the Delhi High Court refused to grant an interim injunction against the use of the mark ‘BOOKMYYATRA’. The Court held that the plaintiff’s mark ‘YATRA’ was descriptive of travel services, lacked distinctiveness, and was not proven to have acquired a secondary meaning. As a result, the Court did not find prima facie infringement or passing off.
Background
Yatra Trademark Infringement and Passing Off Claims The plaintiff, Yatra Online Limited, has been operating since 2006 and owns multiple registrations containing the word ‘YATRA’ including for its domain name yatra.com. It approached the Court alleging that the defendant, Mach Conferences and Events Limited, had adopted the mark ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ and the domain bookmyyatra.com, amounting to trademark infringement and passing off.
The defendant had filed applications to register ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ and ‘BOOKMYYATRA.COM’ for travel-related services. The plaintiff opposed these and simultaneously sought an interim injunction from the Court to restrain the defendant’s use of the mark and domain.
Questions Before the Court
- Whether the plaintiff had enforceable exclusive rights over the word ‘YATRA’.
- Whether the use of ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ by the defendant amounted to trademark infringement or passing off.
- Whether an interim injunction was warranted to restrain the defendant’s activities.
Arguments Presented By the Parties
Plaintiff
- The plaintiff claimed long-standing use and registration of the mark ‘YATRA’, which, it argued, had acquired distinctiveness.
- It contended that the defendant’s use of ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ was deceptively similar and intended to ride on the goodwill of the plaintiff’s brand.
- The plaintiff further argued that its mark, although descriptive, had achieved secondary meaning and was therefore protectable under trademark law.
- It relied on instances of user confusion and brand recognition to support its claims.
Defendant
- The defendant contended that the word ‘YATRA’ means “travel” in Hindi and is generic for travel-related services.
- It pointed out that the plaintiff had disclaimed exclusive rights to the word ‘YATRA’ in its registrations.
- The defendant further stated that the plaintiff had not shown any consumer surveys or material to prove that ‘YATRA’ had acquired secondary meaning.
- The Defendant argued that the mark ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ was a a bona fide and distinguishable composite mark used in a different commercial context.
Court’s Analysis of Yatra’s Infringement and Passing Off
The Court stated that ‘YATRA’ is a word of Indian origin meaning “journey” or “travel” and is directly descriptive of travel-related services. According to the Court, registration alone does not confer monopoly over descriptive words unless secondary meaning is proven. The Court said that the plaintiff had not shown sufficient evidence of acquired distinctiveness, such as consumer surveys or market studies.
The Court observed that the disclaimer of exclusive rights to the word ‘YATRA’ in the plaintiff’s registrations weakens the claim for exclusive use. As per the Court, even in passing off actions, a descriptive mark must be shown to have acquired distinctiveness, which was not established.
With respect to similarity, the Court stated that while both marks include the word ‘YATRA’, the plaintiff had no exclusive right to it. The Court further said that there was no compelling evidence of actual confusion. It also found that the composite mark ‘BOOKMYYATRA’ was not deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s branding in a legal sense.
The Court therefore concluded that no prima facie case of infringement or passing off was made out to justify an interim injunction.
Findings
The Delhi High Court declined to grant an interim injunction against the defendant. It held that the plaintiff failed to establish distinctiveness or secondary meaning in the word ‘YATRA’ and had not demonstrated deception or confusion arising from the defendant’s mark. The suit was allowed to proceed, but no restraining orders were passed.
Relevant Paras
“32. The Court is of the view that the plaintiff has not been able to make out a prima facie case for grant of interim injunction… The word ‘YATRA’ is a common Hindi word meaning ‘journey’ or ‘travel’… it is per se descriptive in nature.”
“35. In the present case, no survey or material has been placed on record to show that the mark ‘YATRA’ has acquired a secondary meaning…”
Case Citation
Yatra Online Limited v. Mach Conferences and Events Limited, CS(COMM) 1099/2024, Delhi High Court, decided on 22 August 2025.
https://indiankanoon.org/doc/80100771/ – Visited on 1 September 2025.
Disclaimer
This case blog is based on the author’s understanding of the judgment. Understandings and opinions of others may differ. An AI application was used to generate parts of this case blog. Views are personal
