( 1 ) "jurisdiction" as Oliver Wendall Holmes said, 'whatever else or more it may mean, is jurisdictio, in its popular sense of authority to apply the law to the acts of men'. Ordinarily jurisdiction is exercised over defendants residing or carrying on business or personally working for gain within the territorial jurisdiction of the court. With the growth of e-commerce and commercial activity over the world wide web, it has become possible for business to be conducted across the globe without actual presence in every place. The present case, inter alia, involves the question of jurisdiction in such a situation.

( 2 ) THE plaintiff company runs a Hindi news channel 'india TV' which was launched in March 2004 It is stated that the channel is one of the leading Hindi news channels in India having popular programs such as 'breaking News' and other programs such as India Beats, Jago India, Aap ki Adalat etc.

( 3 ) THE plaintiff claims to have adopted the mark 'india TV' since 01. 12. 2002 and is stated to have been using the said mark continuously and extensively. It is stated that the plaintiff applied for the registration of the mark 'india TV' in classes 38 and 41 on 22. 01. 2004 of which the mark applied for in class 38 was published in March 2006 and the mark in class 41 was published in February 2005. The claim of the plaintiff is on the use of the words 'india' and 'tv' as a combination and disclaimer on the separate use of the words has been published with the marks of the plaintiff published in the trademarks journal. It is claimed that no opposition to any of the advertisements has been received within the statutory period stipulated.

( 4 ) IT is further stated that the plaintiff had also applied for the registration of the mark 'india TV's MOST WANTED', which is a popular program of the plaintiff's channel, on 22. 06. 2004 in class 38 and the same was registered on 29. 10. 2005 under the registration no. 1291703.

( 5 ) THE mark 'india TV' is thus stated to be a well known mark having enormous reputation and fame and is stated to be exclusively identified with the plaintiff. The 'india TV' mark and logo written in a distinctive manner is claimed to be the original creation of the plaintiff.

( 6 ) BESIDES the news channel 'india TV', the plaintiff is stated to be the owner of the domain name 'indiatvnews. com' which is stated to have been registered by the plaintiff on 18. 11. 2003. It is stated that its channel is made available for live viewing on the said website.

( 7 ) IT is claimed that the plaintiff came across the website of defendant nos. 1 and 2- 'indiatvlive. com' in January 2007 while carrying out an Internet search. The said website contains the words 'india TV' displayed prominently inside the sketch of a television. On search of the 'whois' database of the registering authority, it was found that the same was registered through 'godaddy. COM'. e. defendant no. 3.

( 8 ) THE plaintiff avers that the mala fides of defendants 1 and 2 is confirmed by the fact that the names and contact addresses of the defendants are not mentioned in the 'whois' database. On a search on the site itself, it is claimed that on a reading of the terms and conditions of the subscription for the website 'www. indiatvlive. com', it was found that 'ibl' (India Broadcast Live) and 'www. indiatvlive. com' were trademarks and service marks belonging to IBL. The plaintiff claims that on a further search, it came across press releases showing IBL to be a division of Defendant no. 2. It has also been claimed that on the site of the defendants itself, the plaintiff found that it is stated that ibl, LLC enjoys a strategic relationship with Archer Media Communications incorporated (hereinafter referred to as Archer Media) and the development, technology integration and launch of the website 'www. indiatvlive. com' has been funded by Archer Media.

( 9 ) THE plaintiff avers that defendants nos. 1 and 2 have no rights