Quia Timet Action

Quia Timet Action (QTA) is an action against an apprehended or threatened invasion to prevent someone from doing a wrongful act that is feared or imminent; however, it has not yet been initiated.

It provides injunctive relief to protect one’s rights, even before any violation of such rights is based on fear or apprehension.

In 2002, during my initial years, Mr. Justice J. D. Kapoor, Delhi High Court (“DHC”) passed a judgment in Mars Incorporated (“Mars Inc.”) Vs Kumar Krishna Mukherjee (“KKM”) 2003 (26) PTC 60 (DEL) (renowned as “Mars Case”).

Mars Inc., established in 1911 in the USA and adopted its famous chocolate brand Mars' in 1923, initiated a suit for QTA against KKM before DHC; fearing that KKM would infringe its well-known Trade Mark (“TM”) – ‘Mars’ (registered in India plus 170 countries). Interestingly, KKM, who incorporated a company, namely, Mars Food Private Limited, had neither begun any business nor used the mark 'Mars' w.r.t. his business.

It applied the following three tests before granting injunctive relief in QTA, whether there is any:

(i)??????? is any real threat to the plaintiff’s rights; and

(ii)????? intention to cash upon the reputation of the plaintiff; and

(iii)??? likelihood of any tangible damage to the plaintiff.

DHC states that Mars Inc. enjoys goodwill internationally which has been developed painstakingly over the years through extensive advertisements and quality of its goods. KKM’s intention is to misrepresent the public and create confusion. In every likelihood, the?public at large will assume that KKM is, in any way, connected with Mars Inc.

Mars Inc.'s apprehension that KKM may start manufacturing in the food sector is real. Mars Inc. will suffer a greater hardship than KKM. DHC held that the evil should be nipped in the bud, thus, granted the relief.

As a thumb rule, for a QTA, courts examine every case on its own merits and ensure to apply the QTA principles, i.e., there must be;

(i)?????????? a sincere apprehension of infringement of the plaintiff’s rights; and

(ii)???????? an intention to ride upon the goodwill of the plaintiff; and

(iii)????? a possibility of causing damages to the plaintiff.

?The prominent Mars Case propounds the principle of QTA and proposes that the proprietors must proactively and properly protect their proprietary rights from potential perils.

List of Well-Known Trade Marks