Hindware, in its trademark suit, had alleged that competing brands in sanitaryware space had purchased its registered trademark space to appear as a result when consumers searched for ‘Hindware Sanitary’, or ‘Hindware Sanityware’ or ‘Hindware Sanitary Ware India’.THE DELHI High Court has directed Google LLC to pay damages of Rs 30 lakh in a trademark suit by sanitaryware brand Hindware after the court found that the AdWords programme of Google allowed a tool which leads to infringement.Justice Mini Pushkarna, in an order dated May 22, observed: “Google cannot be permitted to shrug off responsibility by making available a tool (keyword planner tool) that leads to infringement, and then turning around to claim that the said tool was not mandatory.”Google AdWords Programme is a paid referencing and keyword advertising service on their search engine.The court also held that Google cannot invoke the safe harbour provision as an intermediary, noting: “…it has been admitted by Google that it allows use of trademarks as keywords in order to seek out users interested in the goods or services covered by the registered trademark….Google is an active participant in use of the trademarks of proprietors. The trademarks are monetised by Google by using the same as keywords for displaying the paid advertisements on the SERP (search engine results page).”“The Ads Programme of Google encourages the users to use various search terms, including, trademarks as keywords for display of the advertisements to the target audience. Thus, Google cannot seek the benefit of exemption under Section 79 of the IT Act.”Observing that the “conduct of Google” in selling trademarks as keywords takes “unfair advantage” of Hindware’s trademark, the court observed that the same is “contrary to honest practices in industrial and commercial matters”.The court ruled that Google’s actions of “selling or trading off the plaintiff’s trademark to the direct rivals or competitors of the plaintiff, without permission, as well as without sharing the profits with the trademark proprietor, is evidently dishonest.”Story continues below this adHindware, in its trademark suit, had alleged that competing brands in sanitaryware space had purchased its registered trademark space to appear as a result when consumers searched for ‘Hindware Sanitary’, or ‘Hindware Sanityware’ or ‘Hindware Sanitary Ware India’. Sohini Ghosh is a Senior Correspondent at The Indian Express. Previously based in Ahmedabad covering Gujarat, she recently moved to the New Delhi bureau, where she primarily covers legal developments at the Delhi High Court Professional Profile Background: An alumna of the Asian College of Journalism (ACJ), she previously worked with ET NOW before joining The Indian Express. Core Beats: Her reporting is currently centered on the Delhi High Court, with a focus on high-profile constitutional disputes, disputes over intellectual property, criminal and civil cases, issues of human rights and regulatory law (especially in the areas of technology and healthcare). Earlier Specialty: In Gujarat, she was known for her rigorous coverage in the beats of crime, law and policy, and social justice issues, including the 2002 riot cases, 2008 serial bomb blast case, 2016 flogging of Dalits in Una, among others. She has extensively covered health in the state, including being part of the team that revealed the segregation of wards at the state’s largest government hospital on lines of faith in April 2020. With Ahmedabad being a UNESCO heritage city, she has widely covered urban development and heritage issues, including the redevelopment of the Sabarmati Ashram Recent Notable Articles (Late 2025) Her recent reporting from the Delhi High Court covers major political, constitutional, corporate, and public-interest legal battles: High-Profile Case Coverage She has extensively covered the various legal battles - including for compensation under the aegis of North East Delhi Riots Claims Commission - pertaining to the 2020 northeast Delhi riots, as well as 1984 anti-Sikh riots. She has also led coverage at the intersection of technology and governance, and its impact on the citizenry, from, and beyond courtrooms — such as the government’s stakeholder consultations for framing AI-Deepfake policy. Signature Style Sohini is recognized for her sustained reporting from courtrooms and beyond. She specialises in breaking down dense legal arguments to make legalese accessible for readers. Her transition from Gujarat to Delhi has seen her expand her coverage on regulatory, corporate and intellectual property law, while maintaining a strong commitment to human rights and lacuna in the criminal justice system. X (Twitter): @thanda_ghosh ... Read More Tags:delhi high court