In a recent case, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court returned the plaint to the Plaintiffs seeking quia timet action for lack of territorial jurisdiction.
Plaintiffs, a British West Indies company and its licensee, a company with its registered office in Rajasthan, engaged in manufacturing and selling alcoholic beverages in the state of Rajasthan, had initiated the instant suit seeking permanent injunction restraining the defendants from infringement of their trademark and passing off their goods as that of the Plaintiffs'. While the Plaintiffs sought to invoke jurisdiction of Hon'ble Delhi High Court, based on the defendants' website wherein the defendants had announced their plans to launch their product under the allegedly infringing mark throughout India, as well as similar publication in a newspaper quoting the defendants' spokesperson, the defendants, having their registered offices in Mumbai and carrying on their business only in the states of Maharashtra and Goa, objected to this court's jurisdiction.
Considering that neither the plaintiffs nor the defendants have their registered office in Delhi, none of their products are sold within Delhi, and that neither of them had applied for license under the Excise Act to sell alcoholic beverage within the jurisdiction of this court, the Hon'ble Court observed that the plaintiffs had failed to prima facie show its presence/goodwill in Delhi or a strong possibility that the defendants are likely to infringe or pass off their trademark in Delhi. Accordingly, ruling that no part of cause of action has arising within the territorial jurisdiction of this court, the Hon'ble Court returned the plaint for filing in the court of appropriate jurisdiction.
This update is authored by Clasis Law, Clyde & Co's associated firm in India
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.