📍 Delhi High Court | Trademark Infringement | Section 29(4) 📖 4-min read

The Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is facing a trademark infringement suit for naming its AI-powered robotic dog “Champak” — a name identical to the well-known children’s magazine published by Delhi Press Patra Prakashan.

While the Delhi High Court has issued notice, media reports suggest the plaintiff may have overlooked the application of Section 29(4) of the Trademarks Act, 1999 — a potentially critical omission. This section deals with unauthorized use of a well-known mark on dissimilar goods, provided the mark enjoys a reputation in India and the use causes detriment or unfair advantage.

Key Points of the Dispute:

• “Champak” is a registered trademark under Class 41 (publication services).
• BCCI claims the robot dog’s name was chosen through a public online poll.
• The plaintiff alleges trademark dilution, misuse for commercial advantage, and reputational harm.
• However, court observations reportedly note lack of evidence on commercial misuse, and more importantly, no specific pleadings under Section 29(4) — a major strategic gap.

IPVentra’s Insight:

This case highlights how enforcement of trademark rights requires precise legal framing, especially when the dispute involves non-competing goods or services. Failing to invoke the correct statutory provisions — even with a strong brand — may severely weaken a claim