The Supreme Court of India has issued a directive to six educational institutions in Telangana bearing the name ‘Princeton’, requiring them to explicitly state that they are not affiliated with Princeton University in the United States. This ruling comes in light of the ongoing trademark dispute case The Trustees of Princeton University v. The Vagdevi Educational Society & Ors.
A bench comprising Justices PV Sanjay Kumar and K Vinod Chandran delivered this order while adjudicating the appeals filed by Princeton University. The court acknowledged the prestigious Ivy League university’s need to safeguard its reputation and emphasized the potential for confusion among prospective students due to the unauthorized use of its name by other educational entities.
The legal conflict originated from a lawsuit initiated by Princeton University against the Vagdevi Educational Society and other parties in Telangana, who operate six institutions under the ‘Princeton’ name. This lawsuit is currently pending in the Delhi High Court. Initially, a single-judge bench of the High Court denied interim relief to the university. However, a division bench later partially overturned this decision in September 2025, recognizing that a prima facie case existed for Princeton University. Despite this, the balance of convenience was deemed not to favor a complete injunction, as the institutions had been using the name since 1991 and were limited to operations within Telangana.
Consequently, the High Court restricted the respondents from launching any new institutions under the ‘Princeton’ name during the suit’s pendency but allowed continued use for existing institutions, subject to specific conditions. Both Princeton University and the Telangana institutions subsequently appealed to the Supreme Court.
Upon reviewing arguments from both parties, the Supreme Court ruled that additional protective measures were warranted to preserve the interests of both Princeton University and potential students. The court ordered the Telangana institutions to display a disclaimer on their websites, prospectuses, and admission materials, clearly stating their lack of affiliation with Princeton University in the USA. The disclaimer must be prominently displayed, using the largest font size available on the website.
Furthermore, the court mandated that the institutions publish quarter-page advertisements in the Deccan Chronicle and Eenadu newspapers on alternating days from June 1 to June 12, clearly stating that they have no connection with Princeton University. Additionally, signage bearing the disclaimer must be placed outside each campus, and the disclaimer must be printed in bold letters on student certificates. These actions must be completed before the next academic year’s admission process begins.
In concluding the case, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that all issues related to the underlying trademark dispute remain subject to determination by the Delhi High Court and encouraged an expedited resolution. Representing Princeton University were Senior Advocate Chander Lall alongside advocates Nancy Roy, Ananya Chug, Divye Chugh, Rachit Raushan, Shivangi Agnihotri, and Manish Sharma. Representing the Vagdevi Educational Society were Senior Advocate Aditya Sondhi and advocates Kishor Lambat, Suja Joshi, Kashmira Lambat, Devika Dhawan, Rijuk Sarkar of Lambat & Legiteam.
