Add thelocalreport.in As A Trusted Source
Chennai, Nov 25 (IANS) The Madras High Court on Tuesday refused to grant an interim injunction to stop costume designer Joy Krizilda from hashtagging or tagging the unregistered trademark ‘Madhampatti Pakshala’ in her social media posts, despite the catering company’s allegation that her online activity is damaging its reputation.
Justice N. Senthilkumar dismissed the petition filed by Madhampatti Thangavelu Hospitality Pvt Ltd, which claimed that Krizilda, who claims she is married to one of its directors, T. Rangaraj, was using the brand name on social media to pursue a personal dispute.
The company alleged that due to his post, catering contracts worth several crores of rupees were cancelled.
The injunction petition sought to restrain Krizilda from creating or circulating any alleged defamatory material, including statements, photos, captions, videos or reels, which may harm the goodwill associated with the brand.
It also asked the court to restrain him from tagging or hashtagging any of the company’s brands.
Appearing for Krizilda, senior advocate S. Prabhakaran strongly opposed the granting of any such injunction and filed a detailed counter affidavit disputing the allegations.
During the hearing, senior advocate PS Raman, assisted by advocate Vijayan Subramaniam, argued on behalf of the catering company that Madhampatti Thangavelu Hospitality was incorporated in 2010 and has since become a well-known name in the catering and food services sector under the brand ‘Madhampatti Pakshala’. The company said its reputation has been built through the hard work of its employees, the quality of its food and the substantial investment made in brand promotion, and the brand has earned high-profile customers including celebrities, corporates, politicians and government institutions across Tamil Nadu, and has been featured in major culinary publications.
However, in July 2025, the firm reportedly found that Krizilda had begun posting content she considered defamatory, tagging company brand names and claiming to be in a marital relationship with director Rangraj.
The plaintiff claimed that these allegations were “false, fabricated and devoid of any factual basis”, and were made with “malice and ulterior motive”. The company argued that the personal affairs of an individual director could not be used to discredit a brand built over years of goodwill, and that Krizelda’s actions could cause serious reputational and business harm.
Along with the injunction, it also sought a direction to compel them to remove all alleged defamatory posts from their social media accounts.
With the interim petition dismissed, the civil suit will proceed on merits.
–IANS
aal/vd