JUDGMENT :

IA No.14948/2018 (of the defendant under Order VII Rules 10 and 11 of the CPC)

1. The applicant/defendant, in this suit for permanent injunction restraining infringement of trade mark, copyright, passing off and for ancillary reliefs seeks, return/rejection of the plaint on the ground of this Court not having territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit.

2. The senior counsel for the applicant/defendant was heard at length on 30th October, 2018 when this application came up first before this Court. However, on that date, on the request of the senior counsel for the applicant/defendant, the hearing was adjourned to today. Today, the counsel for the plaintiff also appears and the counsels have been further heard.

3. The plaintiff, by this suit seeks to restrain the applicant/defendant from infringing the registered trade mark “CRAZY ROMEO” of the plaintiff by marketing the same goods i.e. alcoholic beverages, under the mark “CRAZY RIDER”. The suit came up first before this Court on 8th October, 2018 when, while issuing summons of the suit and notice of the application for interim relief, the applicant / defendant, vide ex parte ad interim order, was restrained from dealing in products with the registered trade mark of the plaintiff “CRAZY ROMEO” and/or from dealing in alcoholic beverages bearing the label “CRAZY RIDER” or any label deceptively similar to the plaintiff’s “CRAZY ROMEO” label and a commission was also issued to visit the factory premises of the applicant / defendant at district Sonipat, Haryana.

4. The plaintiff, in the memo of parties to the plaint, has given the address of itself as well as of the applicant/defendant at New Delhi. Additional address of the applicant/defendant at district Sonipat, Haryana has also been given. In the plaint, it is pleaded that (i) the registered office of the plaintiff is at New Delhi; (ii) the registered office of the applicant / defendant is at New Delhi; and, (iii) the plaintiff came to know of the infringement when came across the impugned label of the applicant / defendant when the same was filed by the defendant before the Excise Department, Panchkula, Haryana for approval / registration.

5. The plaintiff, in para no.33 of the plaint has pleaded as under:

“33. That this Hon’ble Court has the territorial jurisdiction to try and entertain the present suit as Plaintiff and Defendant both have their registered office within the territorial jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. That Plaintiff is also invoking jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court as the scope and extent of the Defendant’s business is not known at present, it is believed that they have a reasonably large scale business around India and it is therefore strongly apprehended that they will launch the impugned product in New Delhi and would be available within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. It is submitted that the threat that the Defendant will sell and/or offer for sale the impugned product within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court is credible and imminent. Thus, there is a reasonable apprehension that the Defendant has a distribution network in Delhi or likely to sell their products bearing the impugned mark and label within the jurisdiction of this Hon’ble Court. Thus, the Hon’ble Court has the necessary jurisdiction by virtue of Section 20 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. I verify that the category code is 36017.”

6. The applicant/defendant, in the application has pleaded that (i) the territorial jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked pleading that the defendant has its registered office at Delhi and that there is a reasonable apprehension that the defendant will launch the product in New Delhi; (ii) till date, the applicant / defendant has not sold the brand in question in Delhi and has no permission from Excise Department to sell the brand / product in question in Delhi; (iii) the applicant / defendant has no intention to sell the goods in question in Delhi, as the applicant / defendant ha