Delhi High Court: While hearing an application filed under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 for grant of an ex parte injunction restraining Defendant 1, and ex-employee of Physics Wallah, from posting videos calling Physics Wallah a scam, the Single Judge Bench of Jyoti Singh, J, held that the use of social media to disseminate disparaging content has the potential to cause immediate and irreparable harm to trademark’s reputation as also the goodwill of the effected party. Accordingly, the Court granted an ex parte injunction in favour of the plaintiff.
Background
The plaintiff is a public listed unicorn start-up, originally launched as a YouTube channel called ‘Physics Wallah’ in 2014. The channel uploads educational videos to help students across India to prepare for competitive examinations like JEE and NEET. Through its website, mobile app and offline centers, the plaintiff primarily caters to students of grades VI to XII as well as students preparing for competitive examinations. The plaintiff offers courses and course materials crafted by leading educators
The plaintiff had adopted the mark ‘Physics Wallah’ in 2014, in which ‘Wallah’ is an essential feature. In the course of its business, plaintiff also adopted marks such as 
and 
. Further expanding its business, the plaintiff also adopted the marks ‘GATE WALLAH’, ‘CUET WALLAH’, ‘BANKING WALLAH’, ‘MBA WALLAH’, ‘JEE WALLAH’, ‘DEFENCE WALLAH’, ‘COMPETITION WALLAH’, ‘LAW WALLAH’ and other formative marks.
Defendant 1 is a former employee of the plaintiff and the owner and operator of coaching institute trading under the name ‘AIR Cartel’. Defendant 1had uploaded several videos on his YouTube Channel containing defamatory, disparaging and abusive contents against the plaintiff, its founder and employees.
The plaintiff submitted that the impugned defamatory videos and social media posts are aimed at running a negative campaign against the plaintiff and the common theme that runs through is that plaintiff’s educational institutes are a ‘scam’ and all those associated with it are promoters of the alleged scam. The plaintiff averred that such content is severely damaging the reputation and goodwill of the plaintiff.
The plaintiff further urged that Defendant 1 is not only engaging in malicious and defamatory campaign but is also violating the plaintiff’s proprietary rights and infringing the registered Physics Wallah marks by using deceptively similar marks such as ‘EMOTION WALLAH’, ‘SCAM WALLAH’, ‘CW’, ‘BW and 
, for identical services. The impugned marks are phonetically, visually, conceptually and structurally deceptively similar to plaintiff’s Physics Wallah marks and are bound to cause confusion amongst the consumers and members of public.
Analysis, Law and Decision
The Court noted that a prima facie case had been made out by the plaintiff for grant of an ad interim injunction. The balance of convenience lay in favor of the plaintiff and a denial of injunction would case irreparable injury to the reputation of the plaintiff.
Upon comparing the rival marks and services rendered by the plaintiff and Defendant 1, the Court opined that the impugned trade marks are deceptively similar to the registered trade marks of the plaintiff. Rival services are identical and thus confusion in public is inevitable. Contents of impugned videos, transcripts and social media posts prima facie show that they are defamatory, disparaging and also contain abusive content and are calculated to tarnish the reputation of the plaintiff.
Taking note of Defendant 1’s contention of freedom of speech as a defense justifying the publication and circulation of the impugned videos, the Court stated that
“Freedom of speech, guaranteed under the Constitution of India, is no doubt a cherished fundamental right and constitutes the cornerstone of democratic society but it is not an absolute, unqualified, unfettered or unbridled right.”
The Court further held that the freedom of speech does not encompass speech that is defamatory, malicious, abusive or calculated to injure the reputation or dignity of others. It cannot be used as a license to trample upon rights of others, particularly, right to reputation, which is also a valuable right recognized as integral facet of right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
The Court further opined that the use of social media to disseminate disparaging content exacerbates the mischief, given the speed, reach and permanence of digital publications and has the potential to cause immediate and irreparable harm to trademark’s reputation as also the goodwill of the effected party, which one builds over years of hard work and investments.
Thus, the Court directed Defendant 1 to take down/suspend/block the URLs of the disparaging content. The Court also restrained Defendant 1 and all other acting on his behalf from publishing, circulating, or causing to publish any content using plaintiff’s ‘Physics Wallah’ trademarks and/or any other trademark deceptively similar thereto, so as to amount to infringement and/or any content which disparages or denigrates plaintiff’s trademarks and/or its goodwill and reputation, on social media or any other platform.
The Court further listed the matter for 27-3-2026
[PhysicsWallah Ltd. v. Nikhil Kumar Singh, CS (COMM) No. 70 of 2026, decided on 23-1-2026]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Plaintiff: Amit Sibal, Senior Advocate, Mohit Goel, Sidhant Goel, Aishna Jain, Urvashi Singh, Shashwat Mukherjee, Ishaan Pratap Singh, Ramaynia, Advocates
For the Defendants: Utsav Mukherjee, Mamta Rani Jha, Shruttima Ehersa, Rohan Ahuja, Aiswarya Debardarsini, Jahanvi Agarwal, Abhishek K. Singh, Saksham Chaturvedi, Amee Rana, Vishesh Sharma, Nivedita Sudheer, Advocates
Buy Constitution of India HERE
