NAIVEDYA ASSOCIATES Vs. KRITI NUTRIENTS LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is a defendant in a suit instituted in the Court of District Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma Court, New Delhi alleging infringement of trade mark as also copyright infringement.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner in course of hearing has argued that both the parties hail from the State of Madhya Pradesh and no cause of action has arisen within the jurisdiction of the District Court of Shahdara. This is the only point urged before me at the time of hearing.

(3.) In these circumstances, I do not think there is much scope of going into the question of as to whether the Court in which the suit is instituted has territorial jurisdiction to try and determine the suit or not in a petition for transfer of a suit invoking Section 25 of the Code of Civil Procedure. This point is required to be urged before the Court in which the suit is pending. I accordingly decline the plea of the petitioner for transfer of the said suit.