Manjula Chellur, J: in these two writ appeals the order of the learned Single Judge dated 15.04.2010 in W.P. Nos. 20093-94/2009 is assailed.

2. The writ petitions were filed questioning the orders issued by the Registrar of Newspaper for India (for short RNI') dated 15.06.2009 and 29.11.2009. They had also sought for writ of mandamus to the respondents not to verily, approve, authenticate or register the titles 'Financial Times 'Facsimile' and / or FT Weekend Facsimile'. During the pendency of the writ petitions an application came to be moved by the respondents seeking dismissal of the writ petition for want of territorial jurisdiction. This controversy was heard and ultimately the learned single Judge has held that the petitions were liable to be rejected on the ground of lack of territorial jurisdiction. Consequently, the writ petitions were also dismissed keeping all contentions open. Aggrieved by the said order of the learned single Judge, the present writ appeals are filed.

3. The genesis of the subject matter relates to 1984. On 27.2.1984 the appellant company sought for approval of newspaper with the title 'Financial Times' by filing an application with the respondent No.4 (Sub. Divisional Magistrate, Bangalore). By letter dated 5.5.1984 RNI informed the concerned District Magistrate that newspaper title 'Financial Times' was available, on verification. A declaration in this regard required under Section 5(2) of the Press & Registration of Books Act, 1867 (for short 'PRB Act') was sought. Though it was for the publication of a daily newspaper, later on it was changed to weekly publication by another declaration, which was also authenticated by the respondent on 7.10.93. By 1990. the appellant company started publishing its newspaper in English language at Bangalore. Due to some commercial problems it was discontinued and recommenced in 1993. Therefore, the appellant company is publishing its weekly newspaper at Bangalore under the title 'Financial Times' since 1993.

4. A suit came to be filed by the 6th respondent 'Financial Times Ltd., United Kingdom' against the appellant company in 0.S.7087/1997 contending that the appellants herein were carrying on business at Bangalore and they have published and circulated the newspaper under the title FT at Bangalore, therefore, the cause of action arose at Bangalore within the jurisdiction of the City Civil Court at Bangalore, which had territorial jurisdiction to try, entertain and dispose of the suit. It is also pertinent to mention that an exparte order of temporary injunction came to be granted by the Trial Court, which was questioned by the appellants before the High Court in MF A.330/ 1994. This Court set aside the order of injunction making certain observations. This order came to be challenged by the 6th respondent before the Apex Court and on 23.9.1994 the Apex Court declined to interfere with the said judgment and permitted the appellants to continue to publish the newspaper and directed expeditious disposal of the suit. In the meanwhile, the appellant company was also granted permission for the second newspaper under the title 'Financial Times' by RNI for publishing the said newspaper in English from Delhi. Ultimately, the suit came to be dismissed on 24.9.2002 with certain observations, which will be referred to later. This came to be challenged in RFA No.193/2003 and the same is pending consideration.

5. Under Trade Marks Act a certificate issued for registration of newspaper titled 'Financial Times' was cancelled suo motu by the Assistant Registrar of Trade Marks and the same came to be challenged under PRB Act and also by way of writ petition before the High Court of Delhi. Mter issuing rule, stay was granted. Meanwhile, trademark registration time was extended and is in force till 31.12.2012.

6. In the meantime, in the month of May, 2009, respondent No.5 sought for permission to publish fascimile editions of U.R. publication. The appellants learnt about this