The story so far: Actor C. Joseph Vijay’s Tamilaga Vettri Kazhagam (TVK) has been facing multiple civil cases since it launched its party flag. While a representative of the Bahujan Samaj Party (BSP) approached the City Civil Court in Chennai, objecting to the depiction of two trumpeting elephants in TVK’s flag, a trust titled Thondai Mandala Saandror Dharma Paribalana Sabai filed a civil suit in the Madras High Court alleging a “deceptively” similar colour scheme having been used in the flag. The first Assistant City Civil Court in Chennai on July 11, 2025 dismissed an application filed on behalf of BSP to grant an interim injunction restraining Mr. Vijay from using the two elephants in his party flag. The court also refused to grant the liberty to file a fresh application for an interim injunction against TVK’s flag.

What is the BSP’s case all about?

It was Periyaranban alias R. Elangovan, the Tamil Nadu general secretary of BSP, who had filed an original suit in the city civil court against TVK president Mr. Vijay and general secretary Bussy Anand alias N. Anand early this year. According to the plaintiff, BSP was a national party which had been allotted an ‘elephant’ as its reserved election symbol across the country, but for Assam, by the Election Commission of India (ECI). Further, the BSP’s flag too had a picture of an elephant. In such circumstances, the party was shocked to find two elephants in TVK’s flag introduced on August 22, 2024. Though a complaint was lodged in this regard with the ECI, the latter replied that it could not interfere with the disputes related to party flags. Hence, the plaintiff had chosen to file the suit along with the application for interim injunction.

The applicant claimed that the voters generally identify the symbol of elephant with the BSP and that they were bound to get confused if TVK also uses the pictures of elephants in its flag. “The BSP will be the ultimate sufferer. The loyal voter base of the BSP will be sabotaged due to a visually-similar symbol in the eyes of the public. The confusion over symbols has far reaching ramifications affecting the fundamental principles of democratic polity. Permitting the newly-formed TVK to use the symbol of elephant in TVK party flag would amount to diluting BSP’s identity and confusing the electorate,” the application read.

How did TVK respond to it?

TVK’s general secretary Mr. Anand filed a detailed counter affidavit to the interim injunction petition through his counsel K. Gowtham Kumar and the counter was adopted by Mr. Vijay. Categorically denying all assertions made by the applicant as untenable, the TVK office-bearers contended their flag had been meticulously designed to reflect the party’s core values, ideological foundation and its vision for the future of Tamil Nadu.

Unlike a single white colour standing elephant on the blue colour flag of BSP, TVK’s flag had two trumpeting battle elephants flanking a Vaagai flower (Albizia lebbeck). The depiction of the two pachyderms had been inspired by the majestic twin war elephants of historic Tamil armies. “Elephants have long symbolised immense strength, discipline and strategic powers. These figures evoke the commanding presence of Kumki elephants, representing leadership capable of channelling even the fiercest energies towards constructive and victorious outcomes. Remarkably, records from the Chola era state that their armies fielded over 60,000 elephants. Renowned Scholar Thomas R. Trautmann, in his historical study ‘Elephants and Kings,’ notes that the development of war elephants was a characteristic feature of the South Indian military tradition. Classical Tamil literature also celebrates these noble creatures using poetic expressions such as Muransevi Yaanai (elephants with fanlike ears) underscoring their grandeur, distinctiveness and revered place in the Tamil culture,” the two top office-bearers of TVK said.

They said, the two elephants in the TVK flag had no relation to BSP’s election symbol and denied the assertion of any kind of confusion being caused among the electorate.

What clinched the case?

When the interim injunction application was listed for hearing before the city civil court on July 11, 2025, the applicant’s counsel made an endorsement to withdraw the application by stating that a new cause of action had arisen because of another party too using the elephant symbol in its flag. He said that former BSP State president K. Armstrong’s wife Porkodi Armstrong had started a political party named Tamil Maanila Bahujan Samaj Party (TMBSP) and that its flag too had an elephant similar to the one found in BSP’s flag. Therefore, he sought to withdraw the present interim injunction application and sought the leave of the court to file a fresh application against both TVK as well as TMBSP.

Senior counsel Vijay Narayan, representing Mr. Vijay, objected to the plea for grant of liberty to file a fresh interim injunction application against TVK. He said, courts could grant liberty only to file a fresh suit under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of Civil Procedure Code and that no such liberty could be granted for filing fresh applications. Pursuant to the arguments advanced by the senior counsel, the applicant’s counsel made an endorsement that he would not pursue the present application for interim injunction.

“On the basis of the endorsement made by the learned petitioner’s counsel, this petition is dismissed as not pressed against the respondents. Further, TVK and TMBSP are separate parties and founders of each of the parties also separate persons. If the petitioner would like to take legal action against the TMBSP founders, he could very well file a separate suit as against them. The request by the petitioner’s counsel regarding liberty to file fresh application as against these respondents (Mr. Vijay and Mr. Anand), along with others, is not sustainable and rejected because the main suit is pending for the same cause of action,” the civil court judge P. Chandrasekar concluded.