• Home
  • Cricket News
  • Delhi Hc Declines To Restrain Ipl From Using Robotic Dog Champak Amid Trademark Row

Delhi HC Declines To Restrain IPL From Using Robotic Dog 'Champak' Amid Trademark Row

Sakshi Sharma

Robotic Dog 'Champak' (Source:@SamiullahSadaty,x.com)Robotic Dog 'Champak' (Source:@SamiullahSadaty,x.com)

In a significant development, the Delhi High Court on Wednesday declined to grant interim relief to Delhi Press Patra Prakashan Pvt. Ltd., the publisher of the iconic children’s magazine Champak. 

The publisher earlier had sought to restrain the Indian Premier League (IPL) and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) from using the name ‘Champak’ for a robotic dog featured in the ongoing tournament.

Why Did Delhi Press Accuse IPL For Using The Name ‘Champak'? 

The publisher filed a infringement suit objecting to the use of the name ‘Champak' by the IPL for a dog-shaped robot. The robo is equipped with cameras and is used as an entertainment feature during matches. 

It is important to note that according to IPL organisers, the name ‘Champak’ for the robotic mascot was selected following a public fan poll conducted online.

Appearing on behalf of Delhi Press, advocates Amit Gupta and Mansi Kukreja argued that the name ‘Champak’ is closely associated with children’s literature. They also claimed that the IPL’s use of the same name can dilute the brand's distinctiveness and could mislead or confuse the public.

Court Allows IPL To Continue Using Robo Dog ‘Champak’

However, Justice Sanjeev Narula, while hearing the matter questioned the commercial nature of the IPL’s usage and pointed out that the name was chosen through a majority public vote rather than by the BCCI or IPL directly.

Justice Bansal asked the publisher, “Where is the commercial element? They are using for whatever reason, it is very early for me to decide…… please appreciate. The Instagram page emphatically shows that the name is not of their choice. It is a majority win. This is not their choice. What is the element for ad-interim ex parte injunction? There is no adoption per se by the entity naming,” Justice Banerjee said orally, addressing the publisher’s counsel.

The court observed that the mere presence of the name in a fan engagement activity did not amount to direct adoption by the IPL or BCCI for commercial exploitation. It is important to note that  the matter is posted for further hearing on July 9, 2025.