The Supreme Court of India has indicated its preference for Matrimony.com and Jodi365 to resolve their trademark dispute amicably. On Friday, a bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and Alok Aradhe considered Matrimony.com’s challenge against a Madras High Court decision that restrained the company from using the ‘Jodii’ name for its matchmaking app. This case is formally titled Matrimony.com Limited v FreeElective Network Private Limited.
Background of the Trademark Dispute
The issue began when Matrimony.com launched its ‘Jodii’ application in October 2021. FreeElective Network Private Limited, operators of Jodi365, alleged trademark infringement and passing-off, leading to a lawsuit filed in the Madras High Court. FreeElective argued that its ‘Jodi365’ mark, registered in 2010, had been used since 2009 and that the ‘Jodii’ name could likely confuse consumers due to its phonetic similarity.
Matrimony.com countered that FreeElective’s registration only protected the composite ‘Jodi365’ mark, not the individual word ‘Jodi’. It claimed that ‘Jodi’, meaning a couple or pair, is a common term in matchmaking services and is widely used by other platforms.
High Court Rulings and Supreme Court’s Stance
In July 2022, a single judge from the Madras High Court dismissed FreeElective’s suit, ruling that ‘Jodi’ was descriptive and non-distinctive, despite the distinctiveness of the composite ‘Jodi365’ mark. However, a Division Bench of Justices P Velmurugan and K Govindarajan Thilakavadi overturned this decision on August 11, 2026, restraining Matrimony.com from using ‘Jodii’ and ordering the destruction of related materials.
Matrimony.com then appealed to the Supreme Court, with Senior Advocate Amit Sibal arguing that FreeElective’s trademark registration did not cover Class 45, which pertains to matrimonial services. He also highlighted the descriptive nature of ‘Jodi’ in several Indian languages and cited various third-party uses of similar terms.
More Read
Supreme Court’s Recommendation for Settlement
The Supreme Court expressed skepticism about altering the High Court’s order and suggested the parties attempt a settlement. Matrimony.com proposed renaming its app to ‘Jodi Matrimony’ to mitigate business disruption, a solution the Supreme Court encouraged both parties to discuss.
Senior Advocate Gopal Sankaranarayanan, representing FreeElective, opposed the plea, noting the consistent use of ‘Jodi365’ since 2009 and presenting evidence of consumer confusion. Despite the Supreme Court’s inclination for settlement, Sibal pointed out that dismissing the plea would make resolution unlikely. Consequently, the Court agreed to allow time for negotiation.
Senior Advocate Chander M Lall also represented Matrimony.com in the proceedings.
