4 min readNew DelhiJan 7, 2026 07:04 PM IST
First published on: Jan 7, 2026 at 05:23 PM IST
Gurugram court Harvard case: A Gurugram commercial court recently passed an interim injunction against an education firm based in Gurugram for allegedly using the famous trademark “HARVARD” without obtaining consent or authorisation from the authority concerned.
Additional district judge-cum-presiding judge exclusive commercial court Mahavir Singh was hearing the plea filed by the President and Fellows of Harvard College, who sought relief from an educational firm, BIG Red Education, which allegedly dishonestly adopted the famous trademark “HARVARD” and offered educational programs, reproduced, used or otherwise copied the mark to capitalise on the worldwide reputation established by the authority concerned.
Harvard’s counsel argued that the education firm was using “HARVARD” by prefixing it to its courses and using phrases like “Harvard Mentor” on its website and brochures. (Image is enhanced using AI)
It was placed on record that the education firm was using “HARVARD” by prefixing it to its courses, such as “Harvard Youth Leadership Conference”, “Harvard Youth Lead The Change”, “Harvard Debate League” and using phrases like “Harvard Mentor” and “Become a Harvard Trained leader” on its website and brochures, allegedly demonstrating a “malafide intent”.
“An interim injunction order is passed against the defendants and defendant no. 1’s officers, servants, agents…from reproducing, using or otherwise copying, issuing to public, via any online platforms or through any other medium, services educational programs under the name “Harvard Youth Lead the Change”.. or any other name of the program which includes as prefix or suffix the world famous Trademark “HARVARD” of the plaintiff,” the court said.
The court, in its January 3 order, passed an interim injunction order restraining the educational firm and its represenative from reproducing, using or copying, or issuing to the public, through any online platform, any educational programme under the name “Harvard Youth Lead the Change”, “Harvard Debate League” or any other name of the program which includes as prefix or suffix the world famous Trademark “HARVARD”.
The court further restrained the firm from using the website under the name http://www.harvardvic.org or any other website containing the name ‘HARVARD’or doing other activities which are likely to cause “confusion”.
Harvard’s plea
Appearing for the petitioner, one of the advocates, R K Aggarwal, submitted several arguments, including:
- Their client is the registered proprietor of the renowned trademark “HARVARD” and has invested a large sum of money and enormous efforts to advertise its services and promote its brand.
- Their client is engaged in its well-established activities in the field of “education”, “research services”, and related activities since the year 1636 and has a global reputation.
- Harvard would suffer irreparable loss and injury which cannot be computed or compensated in terms of money.
- The educational firm will dilute the uniqueness of the “HARVARD” trademark, tarnish its reputation, and cause confusion among students, who may associate their “substandard programs” with the prestigious services of Harvard, as reported by the magazine, “The Harvard Crimson” in 2024.
- This causes reputational and financial harm that cannot be fully compensated by damages.
‘No infringement’
Appearing for the educational firm, one of the advocates, Karan Bajaj, argued that there is no infringement by their client and prayed for dismissal of the plea, submitting that:
- Their client is not running any college, university or educational institution but is only coaching and guiding the young students to improve their capabilities, and on completion, the certificate is given in the name of the firm.
- Some of the trainers are Harvard alumni, and therefore, they only use the term “Harvard Mentors”, which is permitted under Section 30(2)(d) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999.
Section 30(2) of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, deals with the use of the trademark in honest practices in industrial or commercial matters, and not taking any unfair advantage of the distinctive character.
- There is no question of misleading the participants or anyone else, as only educated children who want to pursue studies abroad undergo a training program with the firm.
Gurugram court Harvard case: The Gurugram Court restrained the educational firm from using website containing the name ‘HARVARD’ or doing other activities which are likely to cause confusion or deception. (Image is created using AI) 
Harvard’s counsel argued that the education firm was using “HARVARD” by prefixing it to its courses and using phrases like “Harvard Mentor” on its website and brochures. (Image is enhanced using AI)
Share
