Madhampatti Thangvelu Hospitality Private Limited has contacted the Madras High Court to control the dress designer Joy Crisis, which claims that the catering has married one of the directors of the company, which measures the “goodwill and reputation” of the unfamiliar trademark Pakshala. “
Justice n. St.hilkumar, on Tuesday (September 9, 2025), ordered the Costume Designer to return to the Costume Designer in a civil suit filed by the catering company and the record Vijayan Subramanian allowed Vijayan Subramanian to issue a private notice to the company’s counsel, as the case was to be heard even after he was heard within a week.
brand reputation
During the argument, senior advocate PS Raman, who represented the plaintiff company, said it was included on August 30, 2010 and a mark in catering and food service business under the brand name ‘Madhampatti Pakshala’. It had become very popular over the years.
Its popularity was due to the hard work of the people involved in the business and the quality of food served by them, the senior advocate said that the company had invested enough money to create awareness among the public about its high quality catering service.
The brand ‘Madhampatti Pakhala’ became a reliable name in the hospitality industry due to concrete efforts and its customers included famous personalities, celebrities, politicians, corporates as well as government and private institutions. It was widely covered in Pak magazines and other media.
Joy Crisilda’s social media posts on Rangraj
However, in July 2025, the company came to know about Ms. Krizilda that the company’s brand name Madhamapatiya Pakhala, other brands associated with it, and other brands associated with it, have started conveying a message to their social media handle, Mr. Raman said.
On its behalf, the company said in its plaintiff: “The Wadi’s trademark is being maligned by the first defendant (Ms. Krizilda), which is promoting false and condemnable allegations, with malice and inverted purpose that she shares alleged marital relations.”
The plaintiff read: “These allegations are completely false, concocted and devoid of any factual base, and deliberately made the trademark of the plaintiff ‘Madhamapatiya Pakshala and other brands and other brands and its management are deliberately created to put the reputation of its management.”
The individual director’s individual matters cannot be used to dislike the reputation of the company manufactured during the years of hardwork, commitment and goodwill; The plaintiff said, such acts of the defendant will cause serious iconic and commercial loss to the company.
The plaintiff urged the court that the defendant tagging, hashtaging, writing, writing, uploading, publishing, broadcasting, distribution, posting, circulating, or any false or malicious material, video, video, reel, caption or “goodwill” of pictures, stopping the pictures of “Goodwill” of “Goodwill”.
It also sought a direction to remove the posts of defamation made in his social media handles and accounts.
