Anupam Mittal’s Shaadi.com wins domain trademark battle; Rs 25 lakh costs imposed by Bombay High Court

Anupam Mittal

• Bombay High Court rules in favor of Shaadi.com in trademark infringement case
• Getshaadi.com found to infringe Shaadi.com's trademark and divert web traffic
• Court grants permanent injunction and Rs 25 lakh costs to Shaadi.com

Did our AI summary help?

The Bombay High Court has ruled in favour of Anupam Mittal, founder of Shaadi.com, in a domain name and trademark dispute, imposing costs of Rs 25 lakh on the opposing party. The court held that the contested domain was created to unfairly benefit from the reputation and goodwill built by Shaadi.com over more than two decades of operations in India and overseas.

The judgment noted that the defendant’s actions amounted to an attempt to mislead users by creating confusion around an established digital brand. The court said such conduct could not be treated as a bona fide business activity, particularly when the brand in question has wide consumer recognition and registered trademark protection.

Findings on cybersquatting and bad faith intent

In its order, the court observed that the disputed domain closely resembled the Shaadi.com trademark and was registered with prior knowledge of the brand’s market presence. This, the court said, pointed to bad faith intent and fell within the scope of cybersquatting. The ruling reinforced that registering deceptively similar domain names with the aim of diverting traffic or extracting commercial benefit violates trademark law.

The court also rejected arguments that the domain was being used for a legitimate or unrelated purpose. It said that even passive holding of such domains could cause harm to trademark owners by diluting brand identity and confusing consumers searching for genuine services online.

Rs 25 lakh costs imposed as deterrence

Imposing costs of Rs 25 lakh, the court said monetary penalties were necessary to discourage repeated misuse of well-known digital brands. The order highlighted that litigation of this nature consumes judicial time and imposes avoidable costs on legitimate businesses, particularly when infringement is evident.

Legal experts say the quantum of costs signals a stricter approach by Indian courts towards domain abuse and trademark violations in the digital economy. It also reflects growing judicial recognition of the value of online brands and the investments made in building consumer trust.

The ruling is expected to strengthen the position of Indian startups and internet-first companies seeking protection against domain misuse. By affirming that established trademarks extend strongly into the online domain space, the court has set a precedent that could influence similar disputes involving brand impersonation and deceptive domains.

For founders and digital platforms, the verdict underscores the importance of trademark registration and active enforcement as online competition intensifies.