INTRODUCTION:
Some brands or products do not need logos or catchy slogans to be recognized; their name alone is enough and In India for online matrimonial space “Shaadi.com” is one such name.
Earlier Trademark was to help consumes to prevent confusion in the marketplace however with rapid growth of digital commerce and online service providers the role of trademark has moved beyond just the source identifier, it prevent consumer confusion as well as safeguards reputation and goodwill of the service providers.
In the context of online platforms, where domain names and digital presence are critical in influencing consumer impression, this change has become particularly pertinent. Even in the absence of tangible goods or visual symbols, a name that is frequently used online can develop a strong association with a specific business. In these situations, the law acknowledges that exploitation of a reputable mark can hurt consumers by unfairly exploiting the goodwill associated with the brand as well as by misleading them.
The idea of a well-known trademark becomes significant in this situation. Because of their extensive recognition and solid public reputation, well-known marks are given more protection under Indian trademark law. Because of the value associated with the goodwill of the mark, such protection goes beyond comparable goods and services.
Recently, a judgement pronounced by the Bombay High court highlighted the importance of well-known mark while recognizing “Shaadi.com” as a well-known mark.
WELL KNOWN MARK UNDER INDIAN LAW
Well known mark is defined under section 2(1)(zg) of the Trade Marks Act,1999 as:
“a mark which has become so to the substantial segment of the public which uses such goods or receives such services that the use of such mark in relation to other goods or services would be likely to be taken as indicating a connection in the course of trade or rendering of services between those goods or services and a person using the mark in relation to the first-mentioned goods or services.”
Unlike other marks, a well-known marks is given more protection because if a well known mark is used in an unauthorized way it is likely to exploit the goodwill.
A well-known mark’s owner may apply directly to the Registrar of Trademarks to have their mark included to the list of well-known trademarks as per Rule 124 of the Trade Marks Rules, 2017. The application must be filed using Form TM-M along with the fees of INR 1,00,000. It must be accompanied by a statement and supporting documentation proving the mark’s reputation. The Registrar must take into account the criteria listed in Sections 11(6) to 11(9) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999 while reviewing an application.
Few criteria are:
- Public recognition
- Length and scope of use
- Geographical reach
- Promotional efforts
- Prior enforcement Rights
Before designating a mark as well-known, the Registrar may request public objections. If there are no objections, the mark is published in the Trade Marks Journal and added to the official list of well-known trademarks.
SHAADI.COM AS A WELL-KNOWN MARK
Recently in PEOPLE INTERACTIVE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED V. AMMANAMANCHI LALITHA RANI & ORS, the High Court of Bombay ruled that the Trade mark “Shaadi.com” satisfies the statutory requirements to be classified as a well-known trade mark within the meaning of Sections 2(1)(zg), 11(6), and 11(7) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Facts: The Plaintiff, owner of the trade mark “Shaadi.com,” filed a suit for infringement and passing off against the Defendants for operating a rival matchmaking service under the deceptively similar domain name “www.getshaadi.com“. The defendants had also used the mark of the plaintiff as part of their meta-tags to attract an estimated 73.34% of all traffic directed towards the plaintiff’s site to their own site. The Court viewed this act as a type of cybersquatting that sought to dishonestly obtain the plaintiff’s goodwill.
Analysis: The judgment establishes that the mark acts as a unique source identifier, the reputation of which has “transcended its immediate field and permeated the consciousness of the general public, trade channels, and business circles”. The Court held that any unauthorised use of “Shaadi.com,” or any deceptively similar mark, would inevitably lead consumers to infer a trade connection with the Plaintiff.
The Court relied on the following combination of quantitative data and qualitative evidence provided by the Plaintiff to reach a conclusion:
1. Long and Continuous Use the Court acknowledged that the Plaintiff’s predecessor-in-title first adopted the mark in 1996, and the Plaintiff has continuously used it since 2002. This “long, uninterrupted and exclusive use” both in India and abroad was a primary factor in establishing the mark’s unique status.
2. Distinctiveness and Secondary Meaning the Court observed that “Shaadi.com”, taken as a whole, is a “distinctive and fanciful expression”. It further accepted the Plaintiff’s submission that the mark had acquired “exceptionally high brand equity” and had become exclusively associated with the Plaintiff in the minds of the public.
3. Substantial User Base and Market Presence The judgment highlights the immense scale of the Plaintiff’s operations, noting a “massive subscriber base” of approximately 20 million registered users and over 3.2 million successful matches at the relevant time. The Court also noted the global physical presence of the brand through “Shaadi Centers”.
4. Financial Growth and Advertising Expenditure The Court relied on certified financial statements to validate the mark’s commercial scale. Specifically, the Court noted:
• Turnover: An increase from approx. Rs. 26.6 crores in 2005–06 to Rs. 91.7 crores in 2012–13.
• Promotion: A total worldwide expenditure of approx. Rs. 172 crores on publicity and advertising between 2005 and 2013.
5. Awards and Recognition the “well-known” status was further proved by the numerous awards the Plaintiff received from the Indian Digital Media Awards, Deloitte, and CNBC-TV18.
The judgment serves as a definitive validation of “Shaadi.com” as a well-known trade mark. The Court concluded that the mark enjoys “an immense degree of reputation and goodwill”. Because of this status, the Plaintiff was entitled to a permanent injunction and costs, as the Defendant’s addition of the prefix “get” was insufficient to distinguish their services from the Plaintiff’s well-known brand.
WHY WELL-KNOWN MARK NEEDS SPECIAL PROTECTION:
Well- known marks are protected due to following reasons:
1. Prevent consumer confusion
2. Stop free-riding on established reputation
3. Preventing Dilution
PROTECTION AND PERCEPTION:
The designation of Shaadi.com as a well-known mark may initially give the impression that a generic word has been given protection. In India, the word “shaadi” is frequently used in everyday conversation. Concerns regarding monopolisation and the limitation of others’ fair and descriptive usage are inevitably raised by this. But this view needs to be explained. The Court has awarded protection for the composite mark “Shaadi.com” rather than just the term “shaadi.” The mark was being used from quite a long time and hence gained acquired distinctiveness and public identity which is why the court recognized the mark as a well-known mark.
CONCLUSION:
The Shaadi.com judgement demonstrates how trademark has evolved from only being a source identifier to protecting reputations in online marketplaces. The Bombay High Court recognised the business reality of online platforms and domain names by classifying the mark as well-known. In order to preserve the availability of generic terms for honest usage, the ruling carefully restricts protection to the composite mark.
Link to the complete judgement: https://jpassociates.co.in/wp-content/uploads/2026/01/shaadi.com-judgement.pdf
REFERENCES:
- Why the Bombay High Court recognised ‘Shaadi.com’ as well-known trademark, Bar & Bench (Jan. 19, 2026),
https://www.barandbench.com/news/why-the-bombay-high-court-recognised-shaadicom-as-wellknown-trademark - People Interactive India Private Limited v. Ammanamanchi Lalitha Rani & Ors.,
Commercial IP Suit No. 225 of 2015, Bombay High Court (Jan. 6, 2026)