Madras HC partially allows appeal against Matrimony.com in trademark suit
The Madras High Court partially allowed Free Elective Network's appeal against Matrimony.com in a trademark suit over the 'Jodi365' mark, though it dismissed the claim for damages. Matrimony.com, which had won the initial suit in 2022, is now considering an appeal to the Supreme Court based on legal advice.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
The Madras High Court has delivered a mixed verdict in a trademark infringement dispute involving Matrimony.com Limited and Free Elective Network Private Limited. In an order dated August 11, 2026, the Hon'ble Division Bench of the Madras High Court partially allowed an appeal filed by Free Elective Network against the dismissal of its suit for injunction and other reliefs.
The original suit, filed by Free Elective Network alleging infringement of its mark 'Jodi365', had been dismissed by the High Court on July 14, 2022. The recent appellate order reverses part of that decision while explicitly dismissing the relief for damages claimed by the appellant.
Legal Proceedings and Next Steps
Matrimony.com disclosed the development in a filing with the Bombay Stock Exchange under Regulation 30 (3) & (4) of the SEBI (Listing Obligations and Disclosure Requirements) Regulations, 2015. The company stated that based on legal advice, it is contemplating filing an appeal before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the Division Bench's order.
The disclosure was signed by Vijayanand Sankar, Company Secretary & Compliance Officer of Matrimony.com Limited, on August 12, 2026.
Historical Stock Returns for Matrimony.com
| 1 Day | 5 Days | 1 Month | 6 Months | 1 Year | 5 Years |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| -0.10% | +2.64% | +22.76% | +33.23% | +4.39% | -47.91% |
How might Matrimony.com's potential appeal to the Supreme Court impact its short-term legal expenses and cash flow projections?
Could the partial reversal of the injunction ruling force Matrimony.com to alter its branding or operational strategies for services similar to 'Jodi365'?
What precedent could this mixed verdict set for other matrimonial platforms facing trademark disputes in India?

































