Google is appealing a Delhi High Court ruling that found it violated Hindware's trademark by allowing competitors to bid on its keywords, raising concerns over trademark infringement.
New Delhi, India Jul 10, 2026 ALN: More than a month after the Delhi High Court (HC) imposed a fine on Google for violating the trademark of sanitaryware major Hindware, the big tech giant has now moved to challenge the ruling. This legal battle highlights the ongoing tensions between technology platforms and traditional businesses over the use of trademarks in digital advertising.
According to the Delhi HC’s cause list, a division bench of Justice V Kameswar Rao and Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora will now hear the appeal on July 10. This appeal comes at a time when the intersection of technology and intellectual property rights is becoming increasingly scrutinized, particularly in India, where the digital economy is burgeoning.
Confirming the development, a Google spokesperson stated, “We are appealing the Delhi High Court’s order, which diverges from established legal precedents in India. Our ads policies reflect standard practices that enable competition and give consumers more choices. We look forward to presenting our position to the court.” This statement indicates Google's intent to defend its advertising practices vigorously, which are foundational to its business model.
The appeal challenges the May 26 order passed by a single-judge bench of the HC. Justice Mini Pushkarna found that the big tech giant allowed other companies to bid on the Hindware keyword on Google Ads, thereby infringing upon the sanitaryware giant’s trademark. This ruling raises significant questions about the legality of keyword bidding practices that many companies, including Google, rely on for revenue generation.
The HC also restrained Google LLC and Google India from using the company’s registered trademarks as an advertising keyword, adding that the search giant’s keyword auction system constituted trademark infringement under the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The implications of this ruling could be far-reaching, not just for Google but for the entire digital advertising ecosystem, as it could redefine how companies utilize trademarks in online advertising.
In its plea, Hindware argued that its rivals’ websites appeared on search results on Google when users searched for keywords like “Hindware” and “Hindware Sanitary.” This, the company said, constituted unfair competition and trademark dilution. The argument underscores the challenges that established brands face in protecting their intellectual property in an era where online visibility is paramount to business success.
The saga traces its origins back to a decade-old commercial lawsuit filed by Hindware in 2013 against rivals Cera and Grohe, as well as a separate case against Google. In its plea, the sanitaryware company argued that rivals Cera and Grohe purchased the keyword of its trademarked brand through Google AdWords, thereby violating its trademark. This case illustrates the complexities of trademark law as it intersects with digital marketing practices, especially in a rapidly evolving technological landscape.
Eventually, Hindware settled its case with the two competitors, but the case continued as Google India and Google LLC remained the only contesting defendants. This aspect of the case highlights the ongoing struggles of businesses to navigate the legal frameworks that govern intellectual property rights in the digital age.
In its May 26 order, the HC observed that Google was earning revenue by auctioning trademarked keywords to competing brands and hence violated Hindware’s trademark by exploiting its “commercial pulling power” without authorization. This finding is significant as it suggests that the court views the practice of keyword bidding not just as a marketing strategy but as a potential infringement of trademark rights, which could set a precedent for future cases.
With its order, the Delhi HC put bidding on keywords of rival companies under legal scrutiny. Meanwhile, Google has moved to challenge the ruling, as it could potentially open the door for brands to pursue legal action against big tech giants and competitors involved in such practices. This situation reflects a broader trend where traditional businesses are increasingly seeking legal recourse against technology companies that they believe are infringing upon their rights.
However, this is not the first time that Google has run into controversy over its keyword bidding system. In 2022, online travel aggregator (OTA) MakeMyTrip filed a trademark infringement and unfair-competition suit against Google and rival Booking.com, alleging that competitors were illegally bidding on its registered trademarks as keywords to divert search traffic. Eventually, the Supreme Court (SC) dismissed MakeMyTrip’s plea, which indicates that the legal landscape surrounding keyword bidding is still developing and remains contentious.
A year later in 2023, the Delhi HC also rejected a plea by insurtech major Policybazaar, seeking to restrain the use of keywords identical to its trademarks on Google’s AdWords Program by other entities. These repeated legal challenges suggest that many companies are grappling with the implications of digital advertising strategies that involve trademarked terms, and they are increasingly willing to take their grievances to court to seek redress.
The outcome of this appeal could have significant implications for the future of digital marketing in India and beyond. If the Delhi HC’s ruling is upheld, it may lead to stricter regulations on keyword bidding practices and empower brands to take more aggressive legal action against perceived infringements. Conversely, if Google’s appeal is successful, it could reinforce the status quo, allowing technology companies to continue leveraging trademarked keywords in their advertising strategies without fear of legal repercussion.
As the digital landscape continues to evolve, the intersection of trademark law and online advertising will likely remain a contentious issue, prompting ongoing debates about the balance between protecting intellectual property and fostering competition in the marketplace. The resolution of this case will not only impact Google and Hindware but could also set a precedent for countless other companies navigating the complexities of digital advertising and trademark rights.
To learn more about the latest developments in Startup Policies & Regulations, stay updated with our exclusive reports and analyses on AiLensNews.
