Madras High Court: In the present application, Ravi Mohan Studios (P) Ltd. (plaintiff), sought a declaration that using the title “BROCODE” for its upcoming film did not violate the trademark rights of Indo Bevs (P) Ltd. (defendant), and requested an injunction to prevent threats or interference with the film’s production and promotion. A Single Judge Bench of V. Lakshminarayanan, J., while issuing a temporary injunction as prayed for by the plaintiff, restrained the defendant from issuing or making groundless threats or otherwise interfering with the plaintiff’s production, publicity, marketing, distribution, exhibition, and release of the film titled “BROCODE”. The Court clarified that, in case notice was not served within the stipulated time, the interim order would not be extended beyond the period of three weeks.
The plaintiff filed a suit seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against the defendant. The plaintiff intended to produce an action-comedy film titled “BROCODE” and had engaged several high-profile actors for the project. Publicity for the film began on 09-06-2025 across print and media platforms, and a teaser was released on 27-08-2025, which garnered over 11 million views on YouTube. The film is under production and scheduled for release in 2026. However, the defendant issued claim, both in person and via email on 06-09-2025 and 09-09-2025, demanded that the plaintiff refrain from using the title “BROCODE” as they have applied for copyright protection over the said trade mark.
In response, the plaintiff submitted an additional typed set showing that the defendant’s trade mark registration attempt had been objected to and is still pending. It was also pointed out that the mark “BROCODE” had only been registered for alcoholic and energy beverages, not for cinematographic works. The plaintiff argued that the defendant’s threats were groundless and interfered with the production, marketing, and release of the film.
The Court was of the prima facie view that the plaintiff had made out a case for the grant of an interim order. The Court further took on record the additional typed set filed by the plaintiff on 03-10-2025. Accordingly, an interim injunction for a period of three weeks was granted as prayed for by the plaintiff, restraining the defendant from issuing or making groundless threats or otherwise interfering with the plaintiff’s production, publicity, marketing, distribution, exhibition, and release of the film titled “BROCODE.”
Further, the Court directed the plaintiff to comply with the procedural requirements under Order XXXIX of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908. The Court clarified that, in case notice was not served within the stipulated time, the interim order would not be extended beyond the period of three weeks.
[Ravi Mohan Studios (P) Ltd. v. Indo Bevs (P) Ltd., O.A. No.972 of 2025, decided on 03-10-2025]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Applicant: S. Karthikei Balan
