Rainforest Cafe, Inc. vs Rainforest Cafe And Ors. on 12 April, 2001
3. Mr. A.M. Singhvi, learned Senior Counsel for the defendants, contended that transborder reputation cannot be relied upon without regular business activity in the country. Since the plaintiff had not commenced any operations in India an action in passing off was not possible. Deception had not been pleaded or made out, since the plaintiff was not the registered holder of a Trade Mark an infringement action was also not possible. The decision in the WHIRLPOOL case was inapplicable for these reasons. The plaintiff had no 'presence' in India - no restaurant, no goodwill, no advertisement, no user of the name and no activity. The plaintiff must prima facie prove that some person was mislead into patronising the defendants mistakenly believing it to be the plaintiff branch, or franchise etc.