Vipin Sanghi, J.

1. By this order, I proceed to deal with the submission of the defendant that this Court does not have the territorial jurisdiction to entertain or deal with the present suit.

2. The case of the plaintiff is that the plaintiff and the defendants are engaged in the common field of manufacturing and marketing of liquor, including country liquor. The plaintiff claims to be an old and established player in the field since 2007. The plaintiff claims to be occupying number one position having more than 35% market share in the country liquor segment in the State of Haryana.

3. The plaintiff states that in the year 2007, it applied for an excise license for manufacturing and marketing country liquor under the trademark/artistic label “MALTA” prefixed with the expression ‘Masti’. Since then, the plaintiff claims to be continuously and extensively selling the said product throughout the State of Haryana. The plaintiff claims to have made a total sale of Rs.1130 crores for the said product alone.

4. The plaintiff states that recently it learnt that defendant no.1, an authorized dealer of the plaintiffs product – who is situated in the State of Haryana, has in active con