Waterways Leisure Tourism Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Mukesh Prasad Thapliyal & Ors.

In a recent judgment, while injuncting a Rishikesh-based entity from using the mark CORDELIA for hotel/lodging services, the Delhi High Court (“Court”) has observed that luxury cruise services would certainly be allied and cognate to land-locked hotel services and cannot be said to be dissimilar on any count. The Court observed that both cruise and hotels fall under the larger subset of hospitality services and have largely identical target consumers and trade channels. Additionally, the court also re-emphasized the principle that registrations for composite device marks encompass the word elements comprised therein as well.

It was the plaintiff’s case that it adopted and was using the Cordelia Cruise device mark (image in the inset artwork) for its sea cruise tourism services since 2020. The Plaintiff owned registrations for its Cordelia Cruise device mark in Classes 39, 41, and 43, since 2021. The Defendant, on the other hand, started using its own versions of marks comprising the word CORDELIA, such as Cordelia Inn/Hotel Cordelia Inn, in respect of its hotel/lodging services based out of Rishikesh, in 2022.

Plaintiff alleged that the defendants had usurped the word CORDELIA in its entirety from the plaintiff’s prior used and registered Cordelia Cruise device mark, thereby making the defendant liable for trade mark infringement. Plaintiff also argued that mere replacement of the word “Cruise” with descriptive words such as “Inn” or “Hotel” were not sufficient to distinguish the rival marks.

Defendants, on the other hand, contended that “Cordelia” is a generic word used across various industries, and that the plaintiff’s claim of infringement was unfounded since the plaintiff’s trade mark registration was only for the Cordelia Cruise composite device mark as a whole and not for the simpliciter word CORDELIA. The defendants also sought to refute the plaintiff’s allegation of infringement on the ground that they were using the impugned marks only in relation to hotels on land, which are distinct from and cannot be confused with the plaintiff’s sea cruise services.

The court dismissed the defendant’s contentions and observed that services of both parties pertain to hospitality services and are also aimed at the same class of consumers and are offered through identical trade channels. The Court also dismissed the defendants’ argument that CORDELIA was a generic or a common word and found this to be unacceptable since the defendant had itself filed a trade mark application for its Cordelia Inn device mark.

Lastly, the Court also ruled that it was settled law by way of many previous judgments that words forming part of registered device marks are also protectable of their own accord as trade marks if they constitute the prominent element of the registered mark.

Thus, the Court restrained the Defendants from using the infringing Cordelia Inn/Hotel Cordelia Inn marks through both online and offline modes till the disposal of the suit.

Waterways Leisure Tourism Pvt. Ltd. v. Mr. Mukesh Prasad Thapliyal & Ors, CS(COMM) 42/2025

Read the judgement copy here.