AAJ TAK Vs. Charcha Aaj Ki: Delhi High Court Protects Visual Identity Of Well-Known Mark In News Broadcasting Industry

Summary

The Delhi High Court in Living Media India Limited and Anr. vs. Charcha Aaj Ki, CS(COMM) 15/2026, concerns the well-known Hindi news channel “AAJ TAK” seeking protection of its iconic logo and formative marks against a newer digital news channel operating under the mark “Charcha Aaj Ki”. The Plaintiffs, Living Media India Limited and its subsidiary, contended that although the words “Charcha Aaj Ki” were different, the Defendant’s impugned logo closely imitated AAJ TAK’s distinctive red–white–black device mark in its overall look and presentation.

Considering the urgency and the likelihood of confusion amongst general public and common viewers, the Court did not await a full trial and granted an ex-parte ad‑interim injunction. The Defendant was restrained from using the impugned logo and colour scheme; however, it was permitted to continue using the name “Charcha Aaj Ki”, provided it adopted a design that did not infringe the Plaintiffs’ rights.

Facts of the Case

The Plaintiff group operates one of India’s largest media houses. Plaintiff No. 1, Living Media India Limited, is the parent company, while Plaintiff No. 2, its subsidiary, operates the AAJ TAK news channel along with affiliated channels in various regional languages.

AAJ TAK began as a news programme back in 1995 and was launched as a full-fledged 24×7 Hindi news channel on 31 December 2000. Over the years, it has consistently used a distinctive logo comprising the words “आज तक / AAJ TAK” in white, rendered in a unique Hindi font, set against a solid red background with a black border. This logo, along with its variants in other languages and formats, has been extensively used and registered as trademarks across multiple classes.

The Plaintiffs hold numerous trademark registrations for “AAJ TAK”, “आज तक” and related formative and device marks, including various language variants. Significantly, the “AAJ TAK” mark has also been recognised as a “well-known mark” by the Trade Marks Registry, thereby affording it a heightened degree of statutory protection.

Between 2020 and 2025, the Plaintiffs invested several crores of rupees in promoting the AAJ TAK brand and generated revenues amounting to hundreds of crores. The channel has received multiple industry awards and has consistently ranked among the leading Hindi news broadcasters in India.

In December 2025, the Plaintiffs discovered that a digital news channel operating under the mark “Charcha Aaj Ki”, was available on the Jio TV platform and other online platforms, using a logo/device that was deceptively similar to the AAJ TAK device mark. The impugned logo employed a red–white–black colour combination and overall layout closely resembling AAJ TAK’s design. It was displayed on the Defendant’s website (charchaaajki.in), its presence on JioTV, and across social media platforms including YouTube, Facebook and Instagram.

Issues

The core questions that arose for consideration before the Court were as follows:

1. Whether the Defendant’s logo and overall get‑up for “Charcha Aaj Ki” infringed the Plaintiff’s registered “AAJ TAK” word and device marks under Section 29 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999?
2. Whether the Defendant’s use of the impugned logo and colour scheme amounted to passing off by misappropriating the reputation and goodwill associated with the “AAJ TAK” mark and misleading viewers into believing an association with the Plaintiffs.
3. Whether the Plaintiffs had established a strong prima facie case, along with balance of convenience in their favour and a likelihood of irreparable harm, so as to warrant the grant of an ex-parte ad‑interim injunction without prior notice to the Defendant.

Arguments

Plaintiff’s case

The Plaintiffs are the registered proprietors of AAJ TAK formative marks, including both word marks and device marks covering a wide range of goods and service, with registrations dating back to the mid‑1990s.

The AAJ TAK device mark, featuring a distinctive font in white set against a red background with black border, is inherently distinctive and has, over time, acquired strong secondary meaning. The Plaintiffs contended that the public associates this unique visual presentation exclusively with AAJ TAK. Further, the mark has also been recognised by the Trade Marks Registry as a “well‑known mark”, thereby entitling it to an elevated degree of protection, even beyond identical goods or services.

According to the Plaintiffs, the Defendant’s impugned “Charcha Aaj Ki” logo adopted the same red–white–black colour scheme, along with a similar framing and arrangement, in the identical field of news broadcasting and across the same television and digital platforms. This, they argued, created a high likelihood of confusion among viewers. Significantly, the Plaintiffs clarified that their objection was not to the words “Charcha Aaj Ki” per se, but to the imitation of AAJ TAK’s distinctive look and feel, namely the device mark and overall colour combination that formed its visual identity.

In light of the extensive and longstanding use of AAJ TAK marks, substantial promotional expenditure, consistent high ratings, numerous awards, and its recognised status as a well‑known mark, the Plaintiffs submitted that the Defendant was attempting to ride on their goodwill and mislead common viewers, thereby committing both infringement and passing off. Given the urgency of the situation and the risk of ongoing public confusion, the Plaintiffs sought an immediate ex-parte injunction.

Decision of the Court

Hon’ble Justice Jyoti Singh, upon examining the record and hearing counsel for the Plaintiffs, the court held that a strong prima facie case had been made out. The AAJ TAK marks were registered and recognised as well-known; the device mark was distinctive; and the Defendant’s impugned logo appeared similar in its overall impression, particularly in terms of colour combination and layout, within the same field of news broadcasting. The balance of convenience was found to lie in favour of the Plaintiffs, as continued use of the impugned logo could mislead viewers and dilute the Plaintiffs’ reputation. The Court further observed that irreparable harm would ensue if interim protection were denied, since loss of goodwill and distinctiveness cannot be adequately compensated by damages.

Accordingly, the Court granted an ex-parte ad‑interim injunction restraining the Defendant, its agents and all persons on its behalf from using the impugned mark/logo or any deceptively similar mark incorporating the red–white–black colour combination and outline associated with AAJ TAK, whether on its channel, website, social media platforms or any other medium Furthermore, the Court clarified that the Defendant was at liberty to use the words “Charcha Aaj Ki” as a plain word mark, provided it did not replicate the Plaintiffs’ distinctive visual get‑up.

Conclusion/Analysis

This order serves as a strong reminder that in media and entertainment industry, brand protection extends beyond the name to encompass the overall visual identity. The Plaintiffs’ success was anchored in the distinctiveness and recognition of the AAJ TAK logo, a simple yet powerful red box with white Hindi lettering and a black border that general public across India immediately associate with the channel.

The Court drew a clear distinction that while the defendant was free to adopt a different channel name, even one containing the words “Aaj Ki”, it could not present that name in a manner that created an association with AAJ TAK. The ruling reinforces the principle that trade dress comprising get‑up, layout and colour scheme, cannot be replicated when it has become uniquely identified with a particular brand.

The recognition of AAJ TAK as a well-known mark significantly strengthened the Plaintiffs’ case. It implied that any attempt by the Defendant to approximate that visual identity within the same industry would invite closer scrutiny and could justifiably be restrained at an early, interim stage.

Overall, the case provides a concise illustration of how courts safeguard not only word marks but also distinctive visual elements, and how well-known marks enjoy enhanced protection in dynamic and high-visibility sectors such as news broadcasting.