Copenhagen Hospitality and Retails v. A.R. Impex
(2021) 87 PTC 602
In the High Court of Delhi
I.A. 8371/2021 in CS (Comm) 262/2021
Before Justice Sanjeev Narula
Decided on July 29, 2021

Relevancy of the Case: Determining the jurisdiction in a trademark infringement case

Statutes and Provisions Involved

• The Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (Section 20, 151)
• The Trade Marks Act, 1999 (Section 134)
• The Commercial Courts Act, 2015 (Section 2)
• The Copyright Act, 1957 (Section 62)

Relevant Facts of the Case

• The plaintiff has filed this suit seeking a permanent injunction restraining the defendants from trademark and copyright infringement.
• Through an interim application, the first defendant seeks the return of the plaint because of a lack of territorial jurisdiction.
• The plaintiff and the defendants had previously tried to collaborate for the franchising of a pizza chain.

Prominent Arguments by the Advocates

• The first defendant’s counsel submitted that their office is in Ahemadabad. The plaintiff’s claims regarding infringement are related to market areas based in Gujarat.
• The plaintiff’s counsel stated that the defendants had contacted the plaintiff multiple times in Delhi.

Opinion of the Bench

• The law on territorial jurisdiction in trademark infringement cases is well settled.
• The defendants have expressed their intention to expand their business operations in Delhi. The defendant’s submission that mere apprehension can never be a basis for jurisdiction is incorrect.

Final Decision

• The court dismissed the first defendant’s application. However, it marked that the observations in this order are only prima facie.

Ojasvi Gupta, an undergraduate student at the Faculty of Law, Banaras Hindu University, prepared this case summary during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2022.