The court established that the Civil Judge, Sr. Division, holds jurisdiction over commercial disputes under the Commercial Courts Act, overruling previous interpretations restricting that power.

JUDGMENT :

Tarlok Singh Chauhan, CJ.

1. This commercial appeal at the instance of the plaintiff-appellant is directed against the order dated 29.07.2024 passed in commercial Suit No. 11 of 2023 by the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.)-I, Jamshedpur whereby and whereunder the plaint filed by the plaintiff-appellant has been directed to be returned for its presentation before the court having jurisdiction.

2. The bare minimum facts as are necessary for the determination of the instant lis is that the father of the Director of the appellant company started a small flour mill in the premises of his home in the year 1970 under the name and style of “Grihasti Atta Chakki”. As the appellant business grew, the appellant company got incorporated in the year 1999 as started production of wheat flour in the year 2001 after obtaining the necessary permissions and licenses. Thereafter, the company adopted the trademark “Grihasti Bhog” and on account of its long and continuous use created goodwill, quality salesmanship and the trademark “Grihasti Bhog” became distinctive with the appellant. The appellants thereafter in the year 2005, 2012 and 2014 made application for Trademark Registration for brand name “Grihasti Bhog” but were unable to pursue the same due to unavoidable circumstances and the application stood abandoned.

3. It is the further the case of the appellant that it was shocked to know that the respondents were selling wheat flour under the name and style of “Grihasti Bhog” which is completely identical to that of the appellant. This fact came to its notice in February, 2023 and immediately thereafter it sent a cease and desist notice to the respondents on 10.03.2023. This notice was duly replied by the respondents vide reply dated 06.04.2024. The appellant thereafter in the month of April, 2023 filed an application under section 12A of the COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT , 2015 before the DLSA, Jamshedpur, but, the respondents refused to mediate and accordingly non-starter report was issued by the Secretary, DLSA, Jamshedpur. Thereafter, on 14.08.2023, the appellant filed the aforesaid suit for infringement of Trademark and passing off under section 134 of the Trademarks Act, 1999 (for Short the Act, 1999) before the learned Civil Judge, Senior Division-I-cum Commercial Court at Jamshedpur.

4. On 06.03.2024 the respondents appeared and filed their written statement to the plaint filed by the appellant stating therein that they had been using the name “Grihasti Bhog” since 2022 and therefore could not be said to have infringed the trademark. According to the appellant there was, however, no whisper of any jurisdictional error as regards the trial of the suit was concerned.

5. On 15.06.2024, the respondent filed an application under Order VII Rule 10 read with section 151 of CPC wherein it was submitted that since the suit has been filed under section 134 of the Trademarks Act, 1999, the court of learned Civil Judge, Senior Division-I cum Commercial court lacked jurisdiction and therefore, the plaint is liable to be returned.

6. The appellant filed reply to the application dated 15.06.2024 filed by the respondents. This application came up for consideration on 29.07.2024 and was allowed as prayed for.

7. Aggrieved by the order dated 29.07.2024, the appellant has filed the instant appeal. It is vehemently contended by Mr. Indrajit Sinha, learned counsel for the appellant that the learned Court below has failed to appreciate the suit being a commercial dispute as defined under section 2(1)(c)(xvii) is governed by the COMMERCIAL COURTS ACT , 2015 (CC Act) and ther