Facts of the Case
A real estate company based in Hyderabad recently filed an application with the Trademarks Registry seeking to register “Reliance Real Estate” as a trademark for a new construction venture. The company claimed originality in the combination of the terms, arguing that the name would reflect its commitment to trust and reliability in the property market. The application was submitted under the class pertaining to construction and real estate development services.
However, the name “Reliance” already enjoys a strong and established presence in Indian commerce, especially due to the dominance of Reliance Industries Limited, a conglomerate associated with a wide array of goods and services. The name “Reliance” has, over time, become a household brand and enjoys trademark protection under several classes, including real estate and infrastructure.
This raised the question—can a third-party company, despite being regionally based and offering different services, register “Reliance Real Estate” as a unique brand name under trademark law?
Issues of the Case
- Can a generic word like “Reliance” be exclusively owned in a trademark context?
- Does the existing popularity and established brand identity of Reliance Industries prevent others from using the word “Reliance” in unrelated or loosely related industries?
- Would the registration of “Reliance Real Estate” amount to trademark infringement or “passing off”?
- Can consumers be misled into believing a connection exists between the Hyderabadi company and Reliance Industries due to the name similarity?
Principles and Related Case Law
The core issue rests on the Doctrine of Deceptive Similarity and Passing Off under the Trademarks Act, 1999. Section 11 of the Act prohibits registration of a trademark if it is identical or deceptively similar to an existing registered trademark that enjoys prior usage or reputation in the market.
In the landmark case of Cadila Health Care Ltd. v. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. (2001), the Supreme Court of India laid down important principles regarding deceptive similarity. The Court held that even phonetic similarity is enough to cause confusion, especially when the earlier trademark is well-known.
Another relevant case is Tata Sons Ltd. v. Manu Kosuri & Ors. (2001), where the Delhi High Court restrained the defendants from using the domain name “tatainfotech.in”, stating that “TATA” was a well-known mark, and allowing its use by a third party would amount to misuse of goodwill.
The word “Reliance” has acquired secondary meaning through extensive and continuous usage by Reliance Industries. Secondary meaning occurs when the public identifies a descriptive or generic term with a particular source. Once this happens, even a common word can get strong trademark protection.
Further, under Section 2(1)(zg) of the Trademarks Act, a “well-known trademark” is protected across classes, even if the goods or services are dissimilar, provided there is likelihood of confusion.
Judgement
In all likelihood, the Hyderabadi real estate company’s trademark application for “Reliance Real Estate” would be rejected by the Trademarks Registry. The use of the term “Reliance” in conjunction with real estate directly overlaps with existing business interests and trademark classes held by Reliance Industries Limited, which has diversified into infrastructure, construction, and housing projects.
The term “Reliance” has gained significant goodwill and consumer association, and its use by another company—even in a different geographic region—could lead to consumer confusion, dilution of brand value, and misrepresentation.
The application would likely be opposed by Reliance Industries, and the company would succeed in its opposition on the grounds of:
- Prior and extensive use
- Well-known trademark protection
- Deceptive similarity and possible confusion
The Hyderabadi firm may argue that “Reliance” is a generic term, but that defense would likely fail. Courts and registries in India have consistently upheld the rights of well-known brands against attempts by third parties to register similar-sounding marks.
Therefore, the trademark “Reliance Real Estate” cannot be registered by the applicant company, unless it obtains express consent or license from Reliance Industries, which is highly improbable.
