Dismissing an appeal in Indian Performing Rights Society Ltd v Sanjay Dalia & Anr, the Supreme Court recently held that a plaintiff cannot institute a copyright or trademark infringement suit at a place where its branch office is located, if the cause of action arises at the place where its principal office is located.
[ihc-hide-content ihc_mb_type=”show” ihc_mb_who=”3″ ihc_mb_template=”2″ ]
Section 62 of the Copyright Act, 1957, and section 134 of the Trade Marks Act, 1999, allow a plaintiff to file an infringement suit at a district court within whose limits the plaintiff resides or carries on business or personally works. This is in contrast to section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908, which requires that suits be instituted where defendants reside or the cause of action arises.
Two matters were clubbed together in the case. In one the Indian Performing Rights Society (IPRS) had filed a suit for copyright infringement in Delhi High Court against owners of theatres in Maharashtra, even though its head office was in Mumbai and the cause of action had arisen in Maharashtra. The IPRS argued that both section 62 of the Copyright Act and section 134 of the Trade Marks Act granted an additional remedy over and above the provisions of section 20 of the Civil Procedure Code.
In the second matter a plaintiff with its registered office in Mumbai filed a trademark infringement suit in Delhi High Court, arguing that under section 134 of the Trade Marks Act it had sufficient grounds for invoking the court’s jurisdiction as it had a branch office in Delhi.
The Supreme Court held that such an interpretation of the two acts would be contrary to the intent of the legislature and would cause hardship to potential defendants as they would have to travel all over the country to defend actions.
[/ihc-hide-content]
The dispute digest is compiled by Bhasin & Co, Advocates, a corporate law firm based in New Delhi. The authors can be contacted at lbhasin@bhasinco.in or lbhasin@gmail.com. Readers should not act on the basis of this information without seeking professional legal advice.
