The Delhi High Court has issued a permanent injunction in favour of Network18 Media & Investments Ltd. after finding that multiple individuals illegally misused its trademark “Moneycontrol” to run deceptive WhatsApp investment groups. The order was passed on 19 December 2025 by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora.
Background of the Case
Network18, which owns the popular financial platform Moneycontrol, approached the court after receiving public complaints. According to the plaintiff, a group of individuals falsely represented themselves as Moneycontrol staff and invited users to WhatsApp groups such as “CINV – The Premier Strategy Group”, promising unrealistic stock market gains and gifts.
The court record shows allegations that these groups claimed affiliation with major financial institutions and promised “30% weekly returns” and even 500% profits with supposed ‘expert training’.
Court Observations
The defendants (Nos. 1 to 21) never appeared in court, despite being served notices electronically. Their failure to file replies led the court to proceed ex parte against them.
The judge noted that the conduct suggested clear intent to mislead the public:
“The activities of the Defendants establish a clear intention of showing a direct nexus or affiliation with the Plaintiff… making a misrepresentation that services are licensed or approved.”
Quoting procedural law (Order VIII Rule 10 CPC), the court emphasised that when no written defence is filed, judgment can be passed without trial.
Key Directions
The High Court granted a permanent injunction and reinforced earlier blocking measures:
- Permanent ban on using “Moneycontrol” or similar marks.
- WhatsApp (Defendant 22) to block accounts linked to the accused for one year.
- Telecom companies (Vodafone Idea, Airtel, Jio) to block associated mobile numbers for one year, with instructions not to reassign them to the same KYC holders.
The court also observed that permanently seizing phone numbers is not needed, as blocking them for a defined period works as a strong deterrent.
“A further period of one year shall work as a sufficient cooling period and act as a disincentive…”
Final Decision
The suit was disposed of with a permanent injunction granted in Network18’s favour. Damages were not pressed at this stage, but the company retains the right to pursue them later if required.
Case Title: Network18 Media & Investments Ltd. vs. Krishnaa @ Jagtar Singh & Others
Case Number: CS(COMM) 328/2024
