JUDGMENT

Ruma Pal, J.-Leave granted.

2. The issue in these appeals is whether the High Court of Delhi has the jurisdiction under Section 62(2) of the Copyright Act, 1957 to entertain a suit filed by the appellants and one other.

3. The suit was filed by the appellants and M/s. Shreechem Laboratories against the two respondents, the first of whom is the Director of the respondent No. 2. According to the plaint, the appellant No. 1 manufactures a medicine for the treatment of malaria. The medicine is sold under the trademark Maloxine in packaging having a distinctive get up, lay-out and design. The appellant No. 1 has claimed to be the owner of the copyright in the trademark Maloxine . The plaint also contains a description of the distinctive carton in which the medicine is sold. According to the appellants, the appellant No. 1 had entered into a contract with appellant No. 2 by which the appellant No. 2 was authorised to manufacture tablets under the appellants trade mark for sale in the rest of the world apart from Nigeria. As far as Nigeria is concerned, the appellant No. 1 had entered into a contract with M/s Shreechem Laboratories for manufacturing Maloxine . These agreements