Bombay High Court Restores Ban on Cognizant Logo in India

Bombay High Court Restores Ban on Cognizant Logo in India

Introduction

The Bombay High Court, Division Bench of Chief Justice Alok Aradhe and Justice Sandeep V. Marne, has restored a ban on Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp’s logo in India. This development revives a long-running trademark dispute between the US-based IT giant and Bengaluru fintech firm Atyati Technologies.

Factual Background

The dispute revolves around a hexagonal logo design. Atyati, which filed its suit in 2023, claims ownership of an orange hexagonal honeycomb tilted in its appearance, representing values of collaboration, compassion, and impact. Atyati argued that the design has been in continuous use since 2019 and forms an integral part of its identity.

Procedural History

• March 2024: The Bombay High Court granted an injunction, noting that the similarity between the marks could confuse the public, leading people to assume a connection between Atyati and Cognizant. The court held that Atyati had made out a strong prima facie case and that the balance of convenience favoured Atyati.
• June 2024: A single judge lifted the injunction, observing that Cognizant had already been using and promoting the logo since 2022–2023. The judge also held that Atyati’s delay in raising objections (only in October 2023) weakened its claim.
• August 2025: The Division Bench restored the injunction, setting aside the single judge’s order and directing that the March 2024 injunction remain in force pending disposal of the suit. The court further instructed the single judge to decide the interim application expeditiously.

Contentions of the Parties

• Atyati’s Position: The Cognizant logo was deceptively similar to its own, risking public confusion and dilution of brand identity. Its hexagonal mark was central to its identity and business values.
• Cognizant’s Position: Cognizant argued that delay by Atyati undermined its claim, as Cognizant had already adopted and promoted the logo well before the objection. It also issued a statement: “We are currently reviewing the interim Order and intend to pursue available legal remedies to defend our position.”

Issues for Determination

1. Whether Cognizant’s logo is likely to cause confusion or association with Atyati’s logo?

2. Whether Atyati’s delay in objecting to the logo weakened its entitlement to an injunction?

Reasoning and Analysis

The Division Bench held that the risk of confusion outweighed the delay factor. It emphasized that consumer confusion in trademarks must be avoided to protect goodwill and ensure market integrity. Atyati had successfully demonstrated a prima facie case of infringement, tipping the balance of convenience in its favour.

Outcome

• Injunction Restored: Cognizant is barred from using the disputed logo in India until the final disposal of the case.
• Expedited Hearing: The single judge has been directed to decide the interim application without delay.

Implications

This order reinforces the principle that consumer confusion is central to trademark protection. It also illustrates that while delay can be a factor, strong evidence of similarity and potential deception can outweigh procedural lapses. For companies, the case underscores the importance of swift trademark enforcement and the risks of adopting logos that resemble existing marks.