No Trademark Infringement: Bombay High Court Refuses Injunction Against Tata Play’s ‘Astro Duniya’ Channel

In Rajeev Prakash Agarwal v. Tata Play Ltd & Ors., the Bombay High Court declined to restrain Tata Play from using the mark “Tata Play Astro Duniya” for its astrology channel. The decision was delivered by Justice Sharmila U Deshmukh while refusing an interim injunction sought by astrologer Rajeev Prakash Agarwal.

Agarwal approached the court alleging trademark infringement and passing off. He claimed that he had been offering astrological and spiritual advisory services since 2005 under the mark “Astro Dunia.” According to him, the use of “Astro Duniya” by Tata Play for its astrology channel launched in December 2020 was deceptively similar to his registered mark.

He argued that the two marks were visually, phonetically and structurally almost identical. The only difference, he claimed, was the addition of the letter “Y” in “Duniya,” which he described as insignificant. Based on this similarity, he sought a court order restraining Tata Play from using the mark or any other deceptively similar expression.

However, the High Court noted that Agarwal’s registered trademark was not merely the words “Astro Dunia.” Instead, it was a composite label mark consisting of the words along with a star device. The court observed that the registration had been granted subject to a disclaimer stating that the owner would not have exclusive rights over descriptive elements of the mark.

Justice Deshmukh also examined Agarwal’s own submissions about the mark’s distinctiveness. He had argued that the uniqueness of the mark lay in the combined use of the English word “Astro,” the Hindi word “Dunia,” and the star logo. Since he relied on the combination as a whole for distinctiveness, the court held that he could not separately claim exclusive rights over the words themselves.

The court further observed that the expression “Astro Dunia” was descriptive in nature. It combines the clipped English term “Astro,” referring to astrology, with the Hindi word “Dunia,” meaning world. When read together, the phrase simply conveys “world of astrology,” which directly describes the nature of the services.

The judge also pointed out that Agarwal’s own invoices used the phrase “ASTRO DUNIA – Your World of Astrology,” suggesting that the term was used descriptively in business communication.

Another important factor was the overall presentation of the competing marks. Tata Play’s mark prominently displayed its well-known house mark “TATA PLAY” above the words “Astro Duniya.” In contrast, Agarwal’s mark displayed “AstroDunia” horizontally along with a star symbol.

The court held that the presence of the well-known TATA PLAY brand was sufficient to distinguish the two marks at a prima facie level.

The High Court also noted that the parties were engaged in different kinds of services. Tata Play operates a television and digital astrology channel, while Agarwal provides personalised astrological advisory services targeted at specific clients.

Further, the court expressed doubts about Agarwal’s claim of continuous use of the mark since 2005. Much of the evidence produced consisted of self-attested material and internal sales figures, which weakened the argument that the mark had acquired strong distinctiveness over time.

Considering these factors, the court concluded that no prima facie case of trademark infringement or passing off had been established. As a result, the application seeking an interim injunction was dismissed.