The appellant-plaintiff instituted the proceedings in Bangalore. The respondent-defendant raised an issue of territorial jurisdiction. In view of Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the plea of the appellant is that the proceedings can be instituted where instituting party is residing or carrying on its business. No doubt, the appellant has an office at Bhopal but according to the averments in the plaint the violation of the Trade Mark took place at Rajpur, District Barwani, Madhya Pradesh. In view of this factual position, the Court at Bangalore has jurisdiction to decide the case in accordance with law.

United Breweries Ltd. vs M/S Som Distilleries And … 

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

 

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

 

CIVIL APPEAL NO.(s). 5689 OF 2018

(Arising out of SLP(C)No.12457 of 2018)

 

UNITED BREWERIES LTD.                                                       Appellant(s)

 

VERSUS

 

M/S SOM DISTILLERIES AND BREWERIES LTD.                                     Respondent(s)

 

O R D E R

Leave granted.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

The appellant-plaintiff instituted the proceedings in Bangalore. The respondent-defendant raised an issue of territorial jurisdiction.

In view of Section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, the plea of the appellant is that the proceedings can be instituted where instituting party is residing or carrying on its business. No doubt, the appellant has an office at Bhopal but according to the averments in the plaint the violation of the Trade Mark took place at Rajpur, District Barwani, Madhya Pradesh.

In view of this factual position, the Court at Bangalore has jurisdiction to decide the case in accordance with law.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

……………………..J. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL)

 

…………………….J. (INDU MALHOTRA)

New Delhi, May 18, 2018.

 

Add a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *