The Delhi High Court has delivered a major ruling that could significantly change the way digital advertising works in India, holding Google liable for trademark infringement in a long-running dispute involving sanitaryware giant Hindware. In a 163-page judgment, Justice Mini Pushkarna imposed ₹30 lakh damages on Google and permanently restrained the company from allowing the use of ‘HINDWARE’ and related variations as advertising keywords on Google Ads.
The case, originally filed between 2013 and 2014 by Hindware’s predecessor HSIL, revolved around allegations that rival companies were purchasing the ‘HINDWARE’ trademark as a keyword to divert customers searching for the brand online. According to court records, competitors, including Cera Sanitaryware and Grohe India, assisted by digital agency Omkara Infoweb, had allegedly purchased keywords like ‘HINDWARE’, ‘HINDWARE SANITARY’, and ‘HINDWARE SANITARYWARE’ through Google’s AdWords platform, now known as Google Ads.
As a result, whenever users searched for Hindware products on Google Search, sponsored advertisements and links of competing sanitaryware brands appeared prominently in search results. Hindware argued that this practice unfairly diverted internet traffic, diluted its trademark value, and created confusion among consumers specifically searching for Hindware products. Although Hindware later settled disputes with Grohe, Cera, and Omkara Infoweb, the legal battle continued against Google to determine whether the tech giant itself could be held responsible for trademark misuse occurring through its advertising system.
Google defended itself by claiming it merely acted as an intermediary under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act and that advertisers independently selected keywords. The company argued that keywords are invisible backend triggers that users never actually see, and therefore, they should not qualify as ‘trademark use’ under Indian law.
However, the High Court rejected this defence, observing that Google was deeply involved in the advertising ecosystem through keyword suggestion tools, auction systems, ad-ranking algorithms, and pay-per-click revenue generation. The court noted that Google not only facilitates keyword purchases but also commercially benefits every time users click sponsored links triggered through trademarked search terms. Justice Pushkarna stated that Google was not functioning as a passive technological tool but as an active participant monetising third-party trademarks for profit.
A key legal finding in the judgment was the court’s interpretation of Section 29(6) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999. The court ruled that even invisible use of a trademark as a keyword constitutes ‘use in advertising’ and can amount to trademark infringement if it unfairly exploits a registered brand’s goodwill. The judgment stressed that it is not necessary for a trademark to visibly appear in advertisement text for infringement to occur. The court compared keyword advertising to hidden meta-tags used to redirect internet traffic and held that such practices become unlawful when they divert consumers searching specifically for a trademark owner. Since ‘HINDWARE’ is a coined and highly distinctive trademark with no dictionary meaning, the court observed that any consumer searching the term was clearly looking for Hindware products and not generic sanitaryware items.
The court ultimately awarded Hindware ₹15 lakh damages in each of the two connected commercial suits, taking the total compensation to ₹30 lakh, payable jointly by Google LLC and Google India within eight weeks. More importantly, the court permanently restrained Google from using or permitting the use of ‘HINDWARE’, ‘HINDWARE SANITARYWARE’, and similar combinations as advertising keywords.
The ruling has triggered widespread discussion across India’s digital marketing and technology sectors because keyword advertising is central to modern online business models. Businesses may now aggressively challenge competitor keyword bidding, while platforms like Google may need stricter filtering mechanisms for registered trademarks in India.
The Tech Portal is published by Blue Box Media Private Limited. Our investors have no influence over our reporting. Read our full Ownership and Funding Disclosure →
Ashutosh is a Senior Writer at The Tech Portal, largely reporting on new tech, and intersection of technology and business. Ashutosh’s career spans across nearly a decade of technology writing across multiple platforms and languages.
